Amnesty Hearings

CHAIRPERSON: We are today starting with the hearing of the applications of Ndzimeni Danster, Monwabisi Eric Kundulu and Lollie Kwakwarie, who are numbers AM0040/96, AM0050/96 and AM4296/96 respectively.

Would counsel please put themselves on record.

MR WESSELS: Thank you Mr Chairman. My name is Wessels, J W Wessels. I'm an advocate from the Port Elizabeth Bar. I'm instructed in this matter by Namkosi Mshlantla and Associates and I'll be appearing for the first two applicants, that is Danster and Kundulu. As far as the third applicant is concerned, Mr Mapoma will advise the Committee what his position is.

MR NYOKA: Mr Chairman, I am Mpumelelo Nyoka. I'm acting for Mr Ngala who is apparently mentioned. I've been instructed by Cradock to be on a watching brief to safeguard his interests, that's all. I play no big role in this matter, thank you.

MR MAPOMA: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman, with regards to Lollie Kwakwarie, the third applicant, you will notice in the bundle of documents that we've got, we do not have his application form here. What happened is that some in 1997 his application form was sent to him to complete.

Unfortunately he never returned it and there's never been communication with him. He has only showed up today and he has advised me that he is no longer proceeding with the application. In any event he is out of jail now. He was released on parole. So his application is not part of the bundle and I can venture to say that he is withdrawing his application for amnesty.

CHAIRPERSON: Is he present?

MR MAPOMA: He is present Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Where is he?

Did you hear what Mr Mapoma has just said? Are you Lollie Kwakwarie?

MR KWAKWARIE: ...[inaudible]

CHAIRPERSON: And do you confirm what Mr Mapoma has just told us, that you want to withdraw your application for amnesty?

MR KWAKWARIE: ...[inaudible]

CHAIRPERSON: I think we ought to get this recorded. Can you come up here? You can speak on that microphone there.

You have confirmed that you are Lollie Kwakwarie and that you have spoken to Mr Mapoma and you confirm what he said?

MR KWAKWARIE: Yes, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: And you now confirm that you wish to withdraw your application for amnesty. Do you understand that that means you cannot proceed with it again?

MR KWAKWARIE: Yes, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: It is a final irrevocable decision on your part?

MR KWAKWARIE: Yes, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well, thank you.

ADV DE JAGER: Mr Mapoma, did you manage to get hold of any of the family of the victims or what is the position there?

MR KUNDULU: Unfortunately Sir, I have not managed to get hold of the families of the victims. The farmer - the telephone numbers that we had for Mr Boy Jordaan, the owner of the farm which was then occupied by the deceased, the Palvie family, I have not managed to get any response to the telephone calls that I've been making throughout the period.

The other telephone number that I had which was a Sydney telephone number for Mr Boy Jordaan, a response I received there was from a helper who said that that farm is not occupied by Mr Jordaan, it's a farm which belongs to a certain person. She referred to that person as Jannie or Mr Jannie. She had no knowledge of Mr Jordaan at all, nor of the incident that took place on the Palvies. That was the helper unfortunately. The said Mr Jannie, I could not manage to speak to him personally, I did not get him.

CHAIRPERSON: I take it you have telephoned Mr Jordaan's house in Cradock?

MR MAPOMA: Yes, I did.

CHAIRPERSON: Not at this farm, his house in town.

MR MAPOMA: I telephoned his house in town and there was no response. I then phoned the number that is at the Leeukop farm and also at that number there was no response Sir, there was no reply.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

ADV DE JAGER: ...[inaudible] that he left for Pretoria and may be returning some time, the exact date is not known.

MR MAPOMA: Yes, the exact date is not known, but I can take it upon myself even after the proceedings start, to try and get hold of Mr Jordaan and if possible trace the next of kin of the Palvies, so that if possible we can get their submissions even at a later stage.

CHAIRPERSON: It appears to me that in the interests of the parties present we should proceed with the hearing but I think that your suggestion is a good one. We will not make a finding, we'll give you time to make contact with Mr Jordaan.

I think that if the police were requested to assist they should be able to, he is obviously a man who owns several farms in the area, they should be able to get information as to his whereabouts and then find out if there are any victims, that is children of the deceased and I think they should be told, not only that they make submissions but that if they are interested they can be given a transcript of the evidence that has been led because that may well effect any submissions they wish to make but if they abide by the decision then it will not be necessary to do that.

MR MAPOMA: Thank you Sir, I take not of that.

CHAIRPERSON: Right, shall we proceed?

MR WESSELS: Thank you Mr Chairman. There is little that I can add to what is set out in the memo as reflecting the actual incident which gave rise to the present applications before the Committee. I have provided the Committee members with copies of the applicants' affidavits and there will also be other documents. May I propose that the application or the affidavit of Danster be marked Exhibit A and the affidavit of Kundulu be marked Exhibit B for easy reference.

CHAIRPERSON: I would also like to place on record that we have been given a copy of the Judgment in the case of S V KUNDULU AND ANOTHER. I think we are obliged to you Mr Wessels for this and we would thank you for having made this available to us.

MR WESSELS: Thank you Mr Chairman. There are two more documents that I beg leave to make available to the Committee at this stage. The first document is a document from the Cradock Advice Office. It is in respect of Mr Danster. This document is with the secretary. If this document can be marked Exhibit C, and there is a similar document which has a bearing on the second applicant, Mr Kundulu from the same office. If that document can be marked Exhibit D.

CHAIRPERSON: In the application we heard yesterday we

were also referred to a letter from the Cradock Advice Office. Perhaps you could tell us precisely who they are.

MR WESSELS: Apart from the information as is reflected on the letter, I am not in the position to tell the Committee anything more of them. Perhaps the applicant, when I lead his evidence, could elaborate. I will deal with this document. If he cannot do so I will endeavour to present further evidence dealing with ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: I don't think it necessarily requires evidence. I think if you could merely inform us, it may be that that explanation would be accepted, I don't know. Mr Mapoma may have some information that he wants to enquire about but I think we could start on the basis that merely informing us would be sufficient. Carry on.

MR WESSELS: Thank you Mr Chairman. Before I tender the evidence of the applicants, there are also some amendments for the sake of clarity that ought to be made. If the Committee will bear with me, page 2 of the bundle of documents, paragraph 9(a) 1. Certain offences have been set out there, 9(a) 1 on page 2, what is mentioned there is

"Murder"

but it will be noticed that later on there is reference made to the two persons that died, that is on page 3, 9(b). So the conviction was not only for one count of murder, it was for two counts of murder. In paragraph 9(a) I, it should be:

"Murder: 2 counts"

The:

"Robbery"

is right. The:

"Firearms"

it relates to the unlawful possession of firearms. There were two counts. The:

"Ammunition"

is right, there was only one count of unlawful possession of ammunition. The:

"Damage to property"

that's also referred to as malicious injury to property, that is right and then there's the reference to ..[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: "malicious injury to property"?

MR WESSELS: That is the m.i.2.p. as it's commonly referred to.

CHAIRPERSON: But surely it's "malicious damage to property" and malicious injury to persons.

MR WESSELS: Well it is commonly and all over the years it's been referred to as m.i.2.p., malicious injury to property, but be that as it may Mr Chairman it is in fact the damage to the property. Then there's reference to

"Housebreaking and theft"

That is an incorrect reference, it is:

"Housebreaking with the intent to rob and murder"

That was the charge which he faced and of which he had been convicted.

Then on page 6 of the bundle of documents, paragraph 12(c), that is right at the top, we have the same references and again it should be:

"Murder X 2"

two counts of murder. That's page 6 of the bundle of documents. The:

"Robbery"

is correct.

The:

"Damage to property"

is in order.

"Firearms"

it refers to:

"2 counts of firearms, illegal possession of firearms. 1 count of illegal ammunition"

and again the:

"Housebreaking and theft"

should read:

"Housebreaking with the intent to rob and murder"

On the same page at 12(g), the sentence is imposed - it's just for clarity's sake that I mention this, it is recorded there the:

"Two death sentences and 20 years"

were imposed. That is correct but the two death sentences were subsequently commuted to:

"Life plus 20 years effective"

On page 9 of the bundle of documents, this particular application form does not have all the details. Paragraph 9(a) 1 merely refers to:

"The farmer and wife murder"

Again it should be:

"Murder X 2"

And I beg leave to have the other charges included there:

"The robbery, the firearm, the possession of firearms X 2, ammunition, the damage to the property"

and again the:

"Housebreaking with the intent to rob and murder"

And then on page 13 of the bundle of documents, the same information that was reflected in respect of the first applicant applies similarly. It's the paragraph 12(c) and 12(g).

Then Mr Chairman, on page 15 of the documents, the counts are set out there, the:

"Housebreaking"

is not complete, it is:

"Housebreaking with the intent to rob and murder"

And the:

"Unlawful possession of firearms"

that there were:

"2 counts"

for the firearms. For the rest it is in order.

On page 18 of the volume of documents reference is made to the ...[intervention]

MR MAPOMA: Excuse me, sorry Chairperson. I would like to get clarity regarding the acts for which amnesty is sought here, is it these amendments in particular? Do I understand it to mean that: "theft" is no longer included there?

MR WESSELS: He was never convicted of theft.

MR MAPOMA: What I want to ...[intervention]

MR WESSELS: Yes, I take the point, thank you Mr Mapoma, Mr Chairman. That's possibly a valid point raised by Mr Mapoma because certain articles were stolen but I think that would be covered by the charge of robbery because robbery is in effect theft by violence. So theft in itself would already be covered by the robbery charge, so we will not be proceeding with an application for theft on its own.

Mr Chairman, I dealt with page 15. On page 18 at the top reference is made to the reported case. The particular reference could possibly just be added there although a copy of the Judgment has been provided, that's 1991 Volume 1 SACR at page 270(A).

On page 19 of the bundle of documents Mr Chairman, this is just for the sake of completeness, again there's only reference to:

"Housebreaking"

where the charges are set out. It should read:

"Housebreaking with the intent to rob and murder"

And the:

"Possession of firearms"

relates to the:

"2 charges of possession of firearms"

On page 21 right at the bottom, again there's reference to the reported case, the reference I've given to the Committee: 1991 Volume 1 SACR 470 (A).

Thank you Mr Chairman, with that then I wish to call the second applicant, Mr Kundulu. He will be testifying first.

ADV DE JAGER: What is the date of the statement on page 19 for instance? There is a date stamp when it was received by the TRC but I can't make it out.

MR WESSELS: The original in Mr Mapoma's file might be clearer. My copy is also not clear Mr Chairman.

MR MAPOMA: It appears to be the 5th of June 1997.

MR WESSELS: Thank you Mr Chairman.

ADV DE JAGER: That was in any event before the latest cut-off date for applications I believe.

MR WESSELS: That is so Mr Chairman. Mr Mapoma can just confirm that.

MR MAPOMA: Yes, is the answer.

MR WESSELS: Thank you Mr Chairman. I then wish to present the evidence of the second applicant, Mr Kundulu first.

MONWABISI ERIC KUNDULU: (sworn states)

EXAMINATION BY MR WESSELS: Thank you Mr Chairman.

Mr Kundulu, how old are you?

MR KUNDULU: 39.

ADV DE JAGER: Sorry Mr Wessels, we've got a document, I don't know whether you've got a copy but we've been supplied with this document by our Evidence Leaders. It's a copy of the charge sheet and there's an Annexure to it, the property that has been robbed or stolen. I don't know whether you've got a copy of that, I think it's a relevant document and you should have a copy of it or be given a copy of it.

MR WESSELS: Thank you Mr Chairman. I don't have a copy of that. Perhaps in the course of use tendering the evidence I will be provided with a copy thereof.

CHAIRPERSON: I think it should also be made clear that also annexed to it is a summary of substantial fact. I will arrange to have a copy made available now.

MR MAPOMA: No, Sir, I don't have a copy. I'm sorry for not giving it to Mr Wessels.

CHAIRPERSON: So there are two copies we want.

MR WESSELS: I'm sorry Mr Chairman, it seems as if I'm off the air, there appears to be something wrong.

CHAIRPERSON: Can you hear me talking?

MR WESSELS: Not through the mike.

PROBLEMS WITH MICROPHONES

MR WESSELS: It's in order now, thank you Mr Chairman.

Mr Kundulu, how old did you say you are?

MR KUNDULU: I'm 39 years old.

MR WESSELS: And did you grow up in the Cradock area?

MR KUNDULU: That is so.

MR WESSELS: Do you have relatives there at Cradock?

MR KUNDULU: My parents are there.

MR WESSELS: Are you married?

MR KUNDULU: No.

MR WESSELS: Were you a member of any organisation whilst you lived in Cradock?

MR KUNDULU: I was a member of Cradoya.

MR WESSELS: Could you just explain what Cradoya is, what sort of organisation is that?

MR KUNDULU: Cradock Youth Association.

MR WESSELS: And was Cradoya affiliated to any other organisation?

MR KUNDULU: Yes, it was affiliated to UDF.

MR WESSELS: Which in turn was again affiliated to the ANC?

MR KUNDULU: Correct.

MR WESSELS: Did you hold any rank in the organisation, the Cradoya organisation?

MR KUNDULU: No.

MR WESSELS: Were you ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: When did you join Cradoya?

MR KUNDULU: In 1984.

MR WESSELS: Was there also a self-defence unit operating at the time at Cradock?

MR KUNDULU: Yes, there were around 1985.

MR WESSELS: Were you in any way connected to the self-defence unit at Cradock?

MR KUNDULU: Yes.

MR WESSELS: How were you connected to that unit?

MR KUNDULU: We would protect the community against the police and the harassment that was going on.

MR WESSELS: Did you have any leader?

MR KUNDULU: Yes.

MR WESSELS: Who was the leader?

MR KUNDULU: Comrade Xolile Ben Situngu was our commander.

MR WESSELS: Could you just tell the Committee something more about Mr Situngu?

ADV DE JAGER: Could you kindly repeat the name please. Who was the commander?

MR KUNDULU: Comrade Xolile Ben Situngu.

MR WESSELS: Could you just tell us something more about Mr Xolile Ben Situngu? What position did he hold?

MR KUNDULU: He would give instructions when we had to go and disarm the farmers. He would get information that a certain farm has weapons and then he would give us the information in turn.

MR WESSELS: You say in paragraph 3 of Exhibit B, that is your founding affidavit, that you received certain information from somebody who used to reside on a certain farm, could you just elaborate on the aspect please?

MR KUNDULU: Yes. There was information that Xolile received. I think it was in February 1987. They said there was a farm Leeukloof with weapons. He said that he'd heard from someone who used to stay on the farm.

MR WESSELS: How far is Leeukop from the area where you were staying at Cradock?

END OF TAPE - POSSIBLE WORDS LOST

MR KUNDULU: The instructions we got were such that we should go to the farm, there were weapons and that we should go and take the weapons and bring them back.

MR WESSELS: And was anything said about what should happen about the farmer?

MR KUNDULU: We were just supposed to disarm the farmer. If he refused to hand them over we were told to do anything but we had to disarm the farmer even if we had to kill him.

CHAIRPERSON: Were you told this as part of your instructions, as an SDU, that you were to kill farmers?

MR KUNDULU: That is correct. At the time we were very angry people. In our area our leaders had been killed. There were children, innocent children who had been killed, therefore when we had to go and disarm the farmers we were not going to do as they liked. We were not going there to please them. We had to do anything, go to any measures to get the arms. If they showed any resistance they would get injured or killed.

MR WESSELS: Who was it that gave you these instructions?

MR KUNDULU: As I have already said, it is comrade Xolile Ben Situngu.

MR WESSELS: And who was present when he gave these instructions?

MR KUNDULU: What do you mean, like a witness? I'm not really understanding the question.

MR WESSELS: We presume that you were present when he gave the instruction, is that correct?

MR KUNDULU: Correct. It was myself, Ndzimeni Danster, Lollie Kwakwarie and Xolile.

MR WESSELS: The Mr Danster that you referred to, is that the first applicant in this matter?

MR KUNDULU: Correct.

MR WESSELS: Did you know the farm Leeukloof that was mentioned to you?

MR KUNDULU: No, I did not know the farm.

MR WESSELS: What steps were taken to execute this order that was given to you?

MR KUNDULU: Please repeat your question.

MR WESSELS: Once this order had been given to you that you told the Committee about, what did you do? How did you go about in obeying this order then, what did you do?

MR KUNDULU: We tried to make the necessary arrangements. First we had to get a car to transport us to the farm.

MR WESSELS: Will you proceed from there? What did you do and how did you continue? In your own words explain to the Committee what happened.

INTERPRETER: The speaker's mike's not on.

ADV DE JAGER: Who was the leader of your group, the four of you who went to the farm?

MR KUNDULU: We had no leader when we went to the farm. The person who gave us the instruction was comrade Xolile Ben Situngu. He was left behind. He just instructed us. It was myself Lollie and Ndzimeni Danster. There was no leader amongst the three of us when we went there.

ADV DE JAGER: And Mr Xolile, where is he presently?

MR KUNDULU: I heard that he died.

MR WESSELS: Thank you Mr Chairman.

Will you then proceed from there, the three of us then proceeded, you got a lift, what happened?

MR KUNDULU: This is what happened: We made the necessary arrangements, we tried to get a car to take us to the farm. We went to Mr Pumujana Galawe. Fortunately when we went and asked him to take us to the farm he said that he was going to drive that way anyway. He told us the time that he was going to go. He had to go and collect his money from various farmers. He said he'd fetch us at about 7 o'clock.

After we had made these arrangements with him we told him where was going to get us, the specific house. It was Lollie, Ndzimeni and myself. We went to the house where we had told Mr Pumujana Galawe he was going to find us.

On the way Lollie went into another house and he said we should wait for him. When he got out of the house he went out with a man that was more or less his age. He introduced this man to us. He said that this man's name Lolosi Mgolose who stayed on the farm. ...[intervention]

MR WESSELS: You're referring to the farm Leeukloof now?

MR KUNDULU: Yes.

MR WESSELS: Yes, proceed please.

MR KUNDULU: He told us that Lolosi stayed on the farm but went to school in the township, it is Lolosi who was going to show us the way.

We then left, the four of us because Lolosi had now joined us. We went to the house where the man with the car was going to find us. We waited for this car. This car truly arrived at about 7 o'clock as stipulated. It was a bakkie.

Lolosi and myself were in the front of the car because Lolosi was going to direct Mr Pumujana to the farm. Lollie and Ndzimeni were riding at the back of the bakkie.

INTERPRETER: The speaker's mike is not on.

CHAIRPERSON: Who was riding at the back of the bakkie?

MR KUNDULU: It was Ndzimeni Danster and Lollie Kwakwarie. There were other people riding at the back of the bakkie. I don't know the people. Can I carry on?

MR WESSELS: Please carry on.

MR KUNDULU: I asked Mr Pumujana not to drop us right at the farm, he must just take us close to the farm so that we walk the rest of the way because we did not want the farmer to see any, the lights of the car. Truly he dropped us close to the farm and we walked the rest of the way.

When we got to the farmer's house we stood on the veranda trying to go inside but the dog started barking. I think Lolosi got scared of the dog. We had told Lolosi what we were going to do at the farm so when the dog started barking he said we should not try to get into the house because that Boer didn't want anybody around his house at that time of the evening. He then said we should go and spend the night at his house. I then asked him what we were going to tell his father if we were to sleep at his house.

There was going to be - his brother was being circumcised so they were going to celebrate that so we were going to say that we were going to attend the celebrations.

MR WESSELS: Just before you proceed from there. Were you armed, you or any of your companions armed at that stage?

MR KUNDULU: We had knives.

MR WESSELS: Is that all, only knives?

MR KUNDULU: Correct.

ADV DE JAGER: ...[inaudible] Did they leave at 7 o'clock in the morning or 7 o'clock at night?

MR KUNDULU: In the evening, it was seven in the evening.

MR WESSELS: Will you then proceed with your evidence. You then proceeded to the house of Lolosi?

MR KUNDULU: Before we went to Lolosi's house we listened to Lolosi and we decided that it would not raise any suspicions with Lolosi's father if we told him that we'd come to the celebrations of his brother's circumcision.

We got there, the brother was there, a girl and a small boy. They were listening to the radio. We greeted them, we introduced ourselves, we told them what we had gone to do there. After that Lolosi's father arrived. He greeted us and he asked us what we had gone to do there. We told him that we had come to the celebrations of the brother's circumcision. He did not have a problem with that, he said we must be given some food and that a place to sleep must be prepared for us.

Before we slept he told us, Lolosi's father told us that or was asking us that we should not leave the house in the morning or too early in the morning because the farmer was going to come and count his sheep and he did not want to see anybody who was not staying at the farm or who was not living at the farm. We agreed and we then slept.

In the morning we got up and truly the white man came and counted his sheep. We were in the house. After a while Lolosi's father came to eat his breakfast. He told us that the white man had left. He said maybe we wanted to go and use the loo or walk around, we were then allowed to do that he said.

We had seen yet another white man in the farm. We asked Lolosi's father what about the other white man, won't he have a problem with us. Lolosi's father's response was that that one was going to leave for town and he was no problem.

We then got out, stood in the sun, went to the loo. After a while we saw a car driving towards town, it was the white man that we'd asked Lolosi's father about. After this white man had left we asked if we could take our baths. Lolosi's elder brother said we should all go because they washed in the dam and the dam is right next to the Boer's house.

It was myself, Ndzimeni, Lollie, Dumezweni, Lolosi's brother and also two boys. Lolosi was left behind. When we got to the dam Dumezweni started taking off his clothes and also the two young boys and they started swimming in the dam. Lollie and I asked Ndzimeni to stay behind with Dumezweni. Lollie and I then went to the farmhouse.

When we got there I threw a stone at a window and broke it. Because Lollie is taller I asked him to open the window so that we could go inside the house. We got inside. We first got into their bedrooms and we searched for the firearms. We found a rifle in one bedroom but it was not loaded with bullets.

We continued to search but we did not find anything but I saw boxes that were locked with padlocks. I thought that there would be firearms in there. I went into the kitchen to see if I could not find anything to break the padlocks. I found an axe and I broke the padlocks. There were plates in the boxes that were wrapped in newspapers. In one box, there was a small safe in the box and when I opened it there were buttons or there were police badges.

I have a cold, I'm not very well. I'll take a glass of water please.

I took this box with these badges and I thought to myself that I was going to show Ndzimeni because it was clear that the farmer was also a policeman because those badges were South African Police badges. We continued the search. We took two to three hours searching the house but we did not get any weapons or firearms.

Lollie and I then left but as we were leaving, going to the dam, I noticed that Dumezweni had seen that we walked out of the farmhouse. I then told Dumezweni that we had come to disarm the farmer. We then told him that he should not be too shocked that we had not come to the celebration of his circumcision but we had come to get weapons and we'd heard that there were firearms in the house.

We then told him that we'd be very pleased if he would tell us where the firearms were because we searched the house and we found a rifle with no bullets. What Dumezweni said was that there were weapons previously, a whole lot of them. The same man who counted his sheep in the morning left with the firearms and he took them to town where he actually lived.

However, the white man who left later to go to town stayed in the farm and the only firearm he had was the rifle that we had found and two small guns. Dumezweni said that he was sure that if the small guns were not there and we had not found them there it was clear that they'd left with the small guns to go to town.

We then took a decision that we should go back to Lolosi. We asked Dumezweni not tell anybody in the farm what we had gone to do or what our intentions were. We then went back because we were going to wait for that white man when he comes back from town because we wanted the two small guns that they had apparently left with.

As we were waiting there Lolosi's other brother arrived. Ndzimeni, Lollie and I went back to the house, the farmhouse. When we got there Ndzimeni and Lollie went inside the house and I was left outside the house. The car parked outside and a white lady opened the kitchen door and got inside. After a moment the husband followed.

It was not too long a while when Ndzimeni called me. When I got inside it was quiet. When I tried to listen carefully - there was a bedroom right next to the kitchen, I heard a noise, some funny noise. I tried to go to the bedroom to see what was happening. When I got there Lollie was busy beating this lady with a hammer. I went back without having said anything.

I went to the kitchen. When I got to the kitchen, on the table there was a bag. I opened the bag and I found a small pistol, car keys. I then told Ndzimeni that I'm going to turn the car around. I said Ndzimeni must not forget to tell Lollie to come with the rifle. I parked the car right next to the kitchen.

Ndzimeni had two suitcases when he walked out. I asked him where these suitcases were going and he said he'd been given those by Lollie. I asked where Lollie was and before he answered Lollie came with a rifle and a wall clock. I did not ask any further. He got inside the car and I drove off.

We got to Lingelihle and Lollie said or requested that we go and, we drive to his uncle's place and he directed me. We got there, parked the car and he took out the two suitcases and the rifle. After that I drove and parked at the graveyard. We burnt the car.

After we burnt the car we dispersed, everybody went to their own house to take a shower or bath and have a change of clothing. We decided that after we'd finished doing that we had to go and meet at the house where we had waited for the car that transported us to the farm in the beginning, Mr Pumujana's car.

Truly we met and after we met we left and went to look for Xolile. We wanted to give Xolile the weapons that we had found. We also wanted to give him a report back. Unfortunately we did not find Xolile's house.

CHAIRPERSON: Can I interrupt you for a moment. What were the weapons you were going to give him?

MR KUNDULU: It was the rifle and the pistols that we'd found.

CHAIRPERSON: The one you found in the bag, did you take it?

MR KUNDULU: Yes, I took it. We were also going to give that one to Xolile. When we did not find Xolile we decided that we should not part without having given Xolile feedback as to what happened at the farm. We then decided to spend the night at that house where we'd waited for the car. We spent the night as decided.

In the morning we went and looked for Xolile at his house again. We did not find Xolile but we found his sister and his brother-in-law. Lollie then told Xolile's brother-in-law that he had a suit and a wall clock that he was selling.

Xolile's brother-in-law took us in his car to Lollie's uncle's house. He then came back with the suit and the wall clock. We also went back to Xolile's house. They said that they would pay Lollie after lunch. When we did not find Xolile we thought that we should phone other comrades.

We did not have public phones in the township at the time because we always used to destroy them because that's how people informed the police, through the public phones. We'd have to phone in town, use the public phones in town.

If the public phones in town were busy we would go to the coloured area to phone. We then went to town that morning, after we had not found Xolile. When we got to the phones in town it was full, there were queues of people trying to phone. We then decided to go to the coloured township to phone.

On our way to the public phones at the coloured township we saw a car coming towards us. When we looked carefully after the car had stopped, it was the police. I had forgotten the police but now I remember, it was Captain Gouws and a Lieutenant Goosen. They said that we should put our hands in the air and they started searching us. They started searching Ndzimeni, they did not find anything, and then Lollie.

Whilst they were searching Lollie I had the small pistol with me. There was one man searching, the other was watching us with a gun. I tried to throw the pistol away because I did not want them to find it with me. Unfortunately they saw me as I tried to throw it away and they arrested us.

MR WESSELS: You subsequently appeared in the Supreme Court, the High Court and you were convicted of various charges.

MR KUNDULU: Correct.

MR WESSELS: You were convicted of housebreaking with the intent to rob and murder, for which you were sentenced to 20 years imprisonment.

MR KUNDULU: Correct.

MR WESSELS: You were convicted on two counts of murder and in respect of both counts you were sentenced to death.

MR KUNDULU: Correct.

MR WESSELS: You were also convicted of robbery, in respect of which you were sentenced to 20 years imprisonment.

MR KUNDULU: Correct.

MR WESSELS: You were convicted on two counts of unlawful possession of firearms, in respect of which you were sentenced to 3 years imprisonment on each count.

MR KUNDULU: Correct.

MR WESSELS: You were also convicted of the possession of ammunition, in respect of which you did not have a licensed firearm for and on this count you were sentenced to 3 years imprisonment.

MR KUNDULU: Correct.

MR WESSELS: And you were convicted for the damage to the motor vehicle and sentenced to 3 years imprisonment in respect of that count.

MR KUNDULU: Correct.

MR WESSELS: The end result was that the terms of imprisonment was ordered to run concurrently, which resulted in you receiving two death sentences and an effective 20 years imprisonment.

MR KUNDULU: Correct.

MR WESSELS: Your co-applicant, Mr Danster, received the same sentences in respect of the same counts for which he was convicted.

MR KUNDULU: Correct.

MR WESSELS: You were transferred to death row in Pretoria where the two death sentences were eventually commuted to life imprisonment.

MR KUNDULU: Correct.

MR WESSELS: And you are presently serving this term of imprisonment at St Eldon's Prison.

MR KUNDULU: Correct.

MR WESSELS: Now in paragraph 10 of your founding affidavit you elaborate on your aim and objective in doing what you did at the time, will you just explain to this Committee the purpose of going to that farm and the purpose of obtaining the firearms? How did this assist or further the objects and aims which you were hoping to achieve?

MR KUNDULU: First of all as I've said, I was a member of Cradoya. In 1985 our leaders were killed, Matthews Goniwe, Calata, Sparrow Mkhonto and Nostelum(?) Mhlauli. They were killed very badly.

As the youth we were sure, we were certain that the police had killed them. Besides that there are a whole of innocent children, for example a six month old baby or five month old baby would be killed by the police in our presence. They would throw teargas canisters for no apparent reason.

They would have certain raids and the farmers would help them. Some of these farmers were soldiers, some of them were reserve police. These farmers helped the police. We would see them helping the police raid our houses. They would beat people up as well. We did not like these farmers, especially the police, because of all they perpetrated against our people.

What fed our attitudes negatively even more were these incidents. We were fighting for our black people and that's why we went to the farm, we did not care whether they died or not because our people were dying all the time as well. What would happen is that our people would be killed and they would say that they are investigating the case, but to this day they would not find the people or the perpetrators who had killed our people.

We wanted the government of the day to lose its white people as well, we wanted them to die too and we were hoping that they would not find us just like our leaders were killed and the perpetrators would never be found. At the time as the youth we did not regret that the farmers lost their lives.

CHAIRPERSON: Could I ask the interpreter what word is using for farmer?

INTERPRETER: Farmer.

CHAIRPERSON: He's using a Xhosa word for farmer?

INTERPRETER: Yes, he says: "Ama Farmer".

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR WESSELS: When you searched the house on your first entry of the house and found the police badges in that box, how did this make you feel?

MR KUNDULU: When I found the police badges - is that the question about the police badges? I did not hear the question.

MR WESSELS: I'll repeat the question. When you found the police badges in that box on your first entry of the house, how did this make you feel?

MR KUNDULU: I was angry, that's why I decided to take these badges, so I can show Ndzimeni that this Boer that lived on the farm was also a policeman and that he had knowledge of the dubious activities of the police. It made me angry and I was filled with hatred.

MR WESSELS: Before you found the police badges in that box did you know that that particular farmer was in any way connected to the police?

MR KUNDULU: When we went there we heard from Lolosi that sometimes policemen come and visit the white man. Through that information we knew that he was a policeman.

MR WESSELS: Was there any other way that you could get hold of firearms for use by the self-defence units?

MR KUNDULU: There was no other way to find weapons except by disarming the farmers because the oppressed people, especially the black people, they would hardly be allowed or be given the opportunity to get licenses for firearms. The government deliberately did not give black people opportunities to get licenses for firearms.

MR WESSELS: What would Xolile have done with the firearms that you intended handing to him?

MR KUNDULU: As I have already said, we got the weapons from the farmers. If we were sent to go and get firearms from a certain farmer, when we find the firearms they would be kept and be given to SDU members eventually. Xolile knew where to take the firearms or who to give the firearms to.

MR WESSELS: What would the SDU members then eventually do with these firearms if they get handed to them?

MR KUNDULU: The firearms were going to be used to protect the community and to shoot the police because we did not want the police in the townships at the time.

MR WESSELS: Whose decision was it not to have the police in the townships?

MR KUNDULU: It was the communities decision, the residents because the police were harassing the residents. Therefore it is the residents, the community that did not want the police in the townships.

MR WESSELS: There is a document before the Committee in this particular instance, it's Exhibit D. This is a document letter from the Cradock Advice Office, could you just tell us more about the Cradock Advice Office? Did you have any dealings with this advice office?

MR KUNDULU: This office, there were two organisations in Cradock, Cradora for the residents and Cradoya for the youth. Everything that happened was reported at the office, they knew what was going on through these two organisations. For example, when we got arrested it is the office that would try to get representatives for us, legal representatives. I hope that is clear for you.

MR WESSELS: Now this document, Exhibit D has been signed by a Mr Ntombela as the Chairperson of Cradoya, did you know this gentleman?

MR KUNDULU: Yes.

MR WESSELS: And it's also signed by a Mr Ngala who was the treasurer of Cradoya, which was in turn affiliated to the UDF. Did you know this gentleman?

MR KUNDULU: Yes, I know Sepiwe Ngala.

MR WESSELS: Did you have any personal dealings with either these two gentlemen that signed Exhibit D?

MR KUNDULU: No. The people that worked with them were the comrades that commanded us.

MR WESSELS: It is recorded in Exhibit D, and I quote from Exhibit D, that

"The motivation is that he responded to a call by the then banned ANC, African National Congress, that the youth should make our townships a no-go area for the police and their informers?

Do you agree with what is stated there?

MR KUNDULU: It is so, I agree.

MR WESSELS: Did you share that objective in order to make the township a no-go area for the police?

MR KUNDULU: Correct.

MR WESSELS: And in order to achieve that objective did you need firearms?

MR KUNDULU: Yes, we had to be armed so that we shoot the Boers and they're not able to come into the township, at least that they're not able to come into the township easily.

MR WESSELS: Did you personally gain anything in the form of a financial benefit from this attack on the farm?

MR KUNDULU: No.

MR WESSELS: Was the attack on the farm in any way associated with a personal vendetta on your part?

MR KUNDULU: No.

MR WESSELS: In a statement by your former co-applicant, Mr Kwakwarie, on page 23 of the bundle of documents refer is made in the second sentence from the bottom, to a comrade Mongezi Nlani. Now this Committee heard, there was reference to a certain Mongezi Nlani in another matter here yesterday, did you know Mr Mongezi Nlani?

MR KUNDULU: Yes, I knew Mongezi very well.

MR WESSELS: What position did he have or what sort of work did Mongezi do?

MR KUNDULU: He did not have any particular position, he was just a member of the SDU.

MR WESSELS: What happened to the two suitcases full of articles that were taken from the farm?

MR KUNDULU: What happened is that when we got arrested Lollie handed them over to the police. The reason why the suitcases were there is that we were waiting for Xolile and expecting him or expecting to talk to him and talk to him also about the suitcases because we went to the farm for arms.

We were told not to take anything else but the firearms but if it does happen that you take anything more than the firearms or other than the firearms, we should not fight over whatever that is, we should take everything that we'd got from the farm, firearm or not, to the commander. This is why we wanted to give Xolile a full report as to what happened and also tell him about the suitcases and then he would see what to do with the suitcases.

CHAIRPERSON: Do I understand you to say you had been told not to take anything but firearms? That's what you've just said, is that correct?

MR KUNDULU: Yes, that was the instruction but he continued to say that if it does happen that one of the comrades takes something else, the people in the mission should not fight over or argue about any other objects. We should take everything to the commander and the commander would see what he does with everything taken from the farm. And the comrade who has taken something else other than the firearm, would have to explain to the commander what they were going to do with the objects.

CHAIRPERSON: Well can you explain why you took all these very many things from this house, contrary to instructions?

MR KUNDULU: I cannot explain because we were told not to argue if one of the comrades takes objects other than the firearms. The commander said that what was important was that we should take everything to the commander, report back to the commander. It is the commander that would deal individually with the concerned comrade who had taken the objects.

CHAIRPERSON: But that was merely to prevent trouble between you wasn't it? You were told not to take anything else but if somebody did take anything else you shouldn't argue about it, you should take it to your commander who would deal with it, isn't that what you've just been telling us?

MR KUNDULU: That is correct.

MR WESSELS: Thank you Mr Chairman. Just on that aspect ...[intervention]

ADV DE JAGER: Okay on that, why did you then allow Lollie to sell some of the property and went with him to sell it in fact, if you had to hand it over to the commander?

MR WESSELS: As I've said, we were given an instruction not to fight over these things. The things that Lollie was selling he was selling at the house where Xolile lived. The very same Xolile who'd given us the instruction to go to the farm. Lollie was not paid but Xolile's brother-in-law said that he would pay him in the afternoon. We had not found Xolile then. Xolile would get back to his house and would take his own decisions, either take the money but he's the one who was, it's Xolile who was going to deal with the comrade, not me.

CHAIRPERSON: So Lollie misbehaved, because you have told us, I thought very clearly, that you had to hand goods over to the commander but you have also in your evidence told us that Lollie saw these people said that he had things to sell.

MR KUNDULU: That is correct, that's the truth. You are correct, he did sell the things.

CHAIRPERSON: But that is wrong, he should not do it you've told us.

MR KUNDULU: The commander was going to deal with Lollie accordingly. I was not a commander, there's nothing I could say to Lollie. I was instructed not to fight over these things.

ADV DE JAGER: And Lollie was a 14 year old child and you at the time were 28 years of age, double his age and you allow him to sell things contrary to what the instructions were.

MR KUNDULU: I could not argue with Lollie about these things, I was following instructions. That Lollie was 14 years of age is not an issue, it is the commander or I knew that the commander was going to deal with Lollie. It was not my place to deal with him. Those were the instructions that I was given. I knew where he'd sold them and that he had sold them as well. It is the commander that was going to deal with him after that.

CHAIRPERSON: You also knew that they had taken two suitcases from the house.

MR KUNDULU: The first time I saw Ndzimeni with these suitcases I asked him where he was taking them and he said he'd been given them by Lollie. There was nothing I could say, I could not argue and I could not ask them to take them back.

CHAIRPERSON: Why not? You could have said: "You're not supposed to take anything, leave them here", there's not difficulty.

MR KUNDULU: I have explained to you, when we've been sent to a mission and one of the comrades does something that he is not supposed to do we're not supposed to fight over that. We were given specific instructions, I could not argue with Lollie.

CHAIRPERSON: It's not fighting for you to tell a 14 year old child: "Look, you know we're not supposed to take anything, just leave those goods here", is it? One would expect a man to do that to a child, to advise him he was doing wrong.

MR KUNDULU: First of all, yes, Lollie was 14 and he was a comrade. He was following instructions and he knew what instructions he had been given. I could not argue with him or give him my instructions. I'm supposed to go to the commander and report everything to the commander. It would be the commander then that would deal with Lollie. I was following instructions.

CHAIRPERSON: Carry on Mr Wessels.

MR WESSELS: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman, should it possibly be advisable to mark the indictment and the summary as Exhibit E for easy reference. I have now also been provided with a copy of those documents. Thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Will you be much longer?

MR WESSELS: I'm almost finished Mr Chairman.

Mr Kundulu, just on this aspect that you were not entitles or not supposed to take anything else but firearms, you have explained to the Committee that you took the motor car.

MR KUNDULU: Correct.

MR WESSELS: And that you eventually set the motor vehicle alight.

MR KUNDULU: Correct.

MR WESSELS: Would you just explain your actions in the light of your instructions not to take anything but firearms from the farm?

MR KUNDULU: We were supposed to take the car. We were given instructions about the car. We were taken from the township by a car and this car did not drop us at the farm, it dropped us close to the farm so that the farmer does not see the car or the lights.

Now, as I've already said, this farm I estimate is about 20 to 25 kilometres from the township. We were told to come back in the car or the bakkie. We could not walk from the farm and walk for 25 kilometres carrying firearms. On your way to the township from the farm you have to go through town. We were told to take the car, the farmers car. That's why we took the car and drove in it and after that we burnt the car, that was the instruction.

MR WESSELS: Mr Kundulu, in the course of your evidence you have dealt with virtually everything mentioned in your founding affidavit, but insofar as there may well be aspects in your founding affidavit that you did not deal with, do you incorporate your founding affidavit as part of your evidence before this Committee and do you adhere to what is contained in your founding affidavit?

MR KUNDULU: Yes, that is so.

MR WESSELS: Thank you Mr Chairman, that is the evidence.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR WESSELS

CHAIRPERSON: We'll take the short adjournment at this stage.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION

MONWABISI ERIC KUNDULU: (s.u.o.)

MR WESSELS: Thank you Mr Chairman. I've completed the questioning in chief.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR NYOKA: Thank you Mr Chairperson. I just have two questions.

Mr Kundulu, I'm acting for Mr Ngala. We are not opposing your application for amnesty, but I just want to clarify one thing. You said that he wrote a letter, your letter representative submitted that he wrote, he signed not wrote, he signed a letter from the Cradock Legal Advice Office suggesting that you get legal representation. What I want to know, did he make any suggestion or advice about the particular farm mission to you before you went to the farm, Mr Ngala?

MR KUNDULU: No.

MR NYOKA: Finally, you said that this farm was about 25 kilometres from Cradock, what I want to know out of interest, if I can be allowed to ask that question, was this farm next to the Post Chalmers Police Station which was a place used in the killing of the PEBCO 3, do you know?

MR KUNDULU: This farm is not towards the same direction, towards the Post Chalmers direction.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mapoma?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR MAPOMA: Thank you Sir.

Mr Kundulu, is it correct that you were trained as SDU's in Cradock?

MR KUNDULU: I was not trained but I was a member of SDU.

MR MAPOMA: Was there no training at all for the members of the SDU's in Cradock?

MR KUNDULU: At the time there was not training.

MR MAPOMA: But there were commanders?

MR KUNDULU: Correct.

MR MAPOMA: Now, when you went to the Leeukloof farm you went there for an operation as members of the SDU, do I understand that to be correct?

MR KUNDULU: Correct.

MR MAPOMA: And normally when people go for an operation there is a commander for that particular operation amongst those who go there, is that not correct?

MR KUNDULU: That is not correct because the commander, our commander did not come with us, he just instructed us and we went.

MR MAPOMA: Are you saying that when you went there for a mission there was no person who was in control of the operation itself?

MR KUNDULU: Nobody had authority to lead us.

ADV DE JAGER: Who decided on the time you should go into the house, who should stay outside, who should search? Wasn't there anybody saying: "You go in, you stand watch", was there nobody taking control?

MR KUNDULU: As I've already said, there was not leader.

CHAIRPERSON: And as you've already said, you were the person who asked Ndzimeni Danster to stay behind with the brother, that is so isn't it?

MR KUNDULU: Correct, I asked him.

MR MAPOMA: And Ndzimeni took those instructions to stay outside, is it so?

MR KUNDULU: Correct.

MR MAPOMA: Now let us come to the farm itself. Was it the general position that was taken by the SDU's that the farmers generally are collaborating with the police?

MR KUNDULU: We would see some of the farmers, some of them were new, that they're working with the police, we would see them.

MR MAPOMA: So, do I understand it that your attack was not directed to any farmer but to particular farmers?

MR KUNDULU: I wouldn't say that there were specific farmers that were targeted. We perceived all the farmers as not being good and these are the reasons: the farmers would treat their employees very badly and other than them supporting the police we knew that they were ill-treating our people.

ADV DE JAGER: But this farmer gave a goat to be slaughtered that morning for the circumcision festival?

MR KUNDULU: I wouldn't know whether they had bought the goat from the farmer or they were given the goat for free.

CHAIRPERSON: But you in your evidence this morning told us that he had been given a goat to be slaughtered by the white man, don't you remember telling us that? Are you now trying to change your story?

MR KUNDULU: I'm not trying to change my story, I'm trying to explain that that goat was given to them by the farmer but I don't know whether they were given the goat free of charge or the farmer was giving the goat to them because they had bought it.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that your explanation for having said they were given the goat?

MR KUNDULU: It's Lolosi's brother who brought the goat who said that they had been given the goat to slaughter, I did not ask.

INTERPRETER: The word: "give" in Xhosa can be either to be given the goat, the two words in Xhosa, to be given the goat or to be given the goat because they'd bought it.

MR MAPOMA: Thank you Sir.

Mr Kundulu, let me perhaps be direct with the question. What I want to find out from you is that, what is it that led you into attacking those farmers in that particular farm actually? From what I gather from you is that all the farmers generally in Cradock were perceived as enemies of the people or as people who were exploiting the people. Now what I want to find out is why specifically this particular was attacked at that time.

MR KUNDULU: The reason why that particular farm was chosen, there was information that there arms in that farm. We were then instructed to go to the farm to get the firearms.

MR MAPOMA: This information which you had, did it tell you who the owner of that farm was?

MR KUNDULU: The information did not, it was not divulged who the owner, the name of the owner of the farm was. We heard from Lolosi's father as he was saying that particular evening that we were going to spend the night, he said we should not get out of the house in the morning because the owner of the house was going to get there and count the sheep. That is when we found out what the name was.

MR MAPOMA: From your evidence it has transpired that there were two farmers who were in that farm, the first one left and then the second one left later. What I want to find out from you is, the information that you had, did you have any information that a particular had these firearms?

MR KUNDULU: Our commander said that he got information that at that farm there were weapons. He did not stipulate and say whether it was the owner who had the weapons or it was the other man that's dead there. We heard when we were already in the farm that it is the owner who had the weapons but had left with them to the house he lived in town. It is the white man that left later that we expected to have the two firearms that we were told of.

MR MAPOMA: So what you're saying is that these firearms that you were looking for turned out actually to be those which were taken to town and were not in the farm at the time?

MR KUNDULU: Which ones are you talking about now?

MR MAPOMA: You are saying that it turned out that the arms were taken to town by the farmer who stays in town, haven't you just said that?

MR KUNDULU: Correct.

MR MAPOMA: So when you attacked there, there were no firearms or the firearms you were looking for were not there?

MR KUNDULU: You're saying that when we were attacking? We knew that there were two firearms that were with the people that had gone to town, the man that had gone to town. We were waiting there for those two firearms that we'd heard that they must have left with them as we did not find them in the house.

MR MAPOMA: Now when you went to the house for the first time you knew that the farmers were not there, is it so?

MR KUNDULU: If there was nobody in the house, yes.

MR MAPOMA: And your instructions were to go and disarm the farmers, is it so?

MR KUNDULU: Correct.

MR MAPOMA: Now how did you expect to disarm the farmers when they were not there?

MR KUNDULU: Whilst they were away we went and broke into the house because we thought that there were weapons inside the house. We were not expecting them to have left with the arms to town, that we were told that they were in the house and that there was a whole lot of them.

We broke into the house in their absence to find the firearms that we were told were there but unfortunately we only found the rifle. Ndzimeni then told us that there were no weapons inside the house, they were with the white man who had come in the morning to count the sheep.

They however said that there are two firearms that were with the white people that had left later, after the owner of the farm had left. We then decided to wait for these people because we wanted those forearms.

MR MAPOMA: I'm still coming to that point, just answer the question that's being asked and confine your answer to the question that is being asked. Now, when you went there, when you broke into that house, what was your intention? Let me ask this question, when you broke into the house for the first time, from what I gather from you, your intention was to steal those weapons, is it not so?

MR KUNDULU: Correct.

MR MAPOMA: So you broke into that house with an intention not to rob but to steal?

MR KUNDULU: To find the arms, the weapons.

MR MAPOMA: Then you found the rifle, what did you do with it?

MR KUNDULU: We found the rifle, we put it aside as we were searching for the rest of the weapons that we thought were there.

MR MAPOMA: Then you left, did you leave with it?

MR KUNDULU: We left it behind.

MR MAPOMA: Why? You were there to take the arms and arm was there, why do you leave it now?

MR KUNDULU: The reason why we left the rifle is that we were still going to look for a car that we were going to put the firearm in and that we were going to leave in as well, that's why we left the rifle there at the time.

MR MAPOMA: And the axe, what did you do with the axe?

MR KUNDULU: I just broke the padlocks.

MR MAPOMA: Did you leave it there also?

MR KUNDULU: Correct.

MR MAPOMA: Now when you came back the second time, when the farmers were there already, did you break into the house?

MR KUNDULU: We only broke into the house once, not twice.

MR MAPOMA: Now when you came there the second time, what I gathered from your evidence, you have not told the Committee who killed Mr Palvie. Who killed Mr Palvie?

MR KUNDULU: The reason why I did not say anything is because I was not inside when he was killed, but I did say as Ndzimeni was calling me to go inside - after Mr Palvie and Mrs Palvie had gone in, after a moment I was called to go in by Ndzimeni. It was quiet but there was a room right next to the kitchen, I heard that there was a noise coming from there. When I got there Lollie was beating Mrs Palvie with a hammer. I did not say anything, I turned. He was busy beating this woman up. I did not see how Mr Palvie was killed but I saw Mrs Palvie being beaten by Lollie. I did not wait, I turned around.

MR MAPOMA: So is it your evidence that you did not kill anybody?

MR KUNDULU: I did not kill anybody there.

ADV DE JAGER: This Mr Palvie, was he a strongly built man? Was he a strong man, the white man, strongly built, a big man?

MR KUNDULU: When I saw him alighting from the car he looked like a pretty strong man.

ADV DE JAGER: Do you think Lollie could kill him, a 14 year old child?

MR KUNDULU: Yes. Can I explain something please? When somebody takes a decision that one is a comrade there is no child in the struggle. When you go to a mission everybody knows that they could lose their lives or that they could kill. Lollie did not go there as a child, he took a decision to fight against the government of oppression.

MR MAPOMA: Where was Danster, was he outside at the time when the Palvie's were being attacked?

INTERPRETER: Could the Evidence Leader please wait for the interpretation?

MR KUNDULU: He was inside.

MR MAPOMA: Did you not instruct him to wait outside?

MR KUNDULU: No.

MR MAPOMA: Was he where Lollie was at the time the Palvie's were being attacked?

MR KUNDULU: I wouldn't know whether he was with Lollie because I was outside, they were inside. I don't know exactly where they were inside but I when I walked in, as I was being call in, I could not see Lollie but when I heard the noise emanating from the room next to the kitchen, that's when I saw him beating Mrs Palvie.

MR MAPOMA: Mr Kundulu, from your evidence now it appears that you did not participate in that mission of killing the Palvies, you did not also participate in that mission of taking away the good which were there. All that you did is that you took the pistol and the car only, am I understanding you correctly?

MR KUNDULU: To explain to you, I did not kill because I was outside. When I got in I took the pistol that I found in the bag and the car keys.

MR MAPOMA: Do you know of any reason why the Palvie's were killed?

MR KUNDULU: I have been told the reasons.

MR MAPOMA: What is the reason why they were killed, to your knowledge?

MR KUNDULU: I was told that Mr Palvie started fighting or resisting Lollie, that's when they were attacked.

MR MAPOMA: Attacked by whom?

MR KUNDULU: Ndzimeni and Lollie, that's what they told me.

MR MAPOMA: So you now know how Mr Palvie was killed?

MR KUNDULU: Yes, I was told how they were killed but I did not see.

MR MAPOMA: Do you associate yourself in any way with the killing of the Palvie's?

MR KUNDULU: Yes, I do associate myself with the killing. First of all, if I was inside the house I was also going to kill them and that is why I associate myself with their killing. Their dying at the time gave me peace, I felt better that they died.

MR MAPOMA: What made you feel better, when a person is killed?

MR KUNDULU: The reason why I got some form of peace is because we hated them, we hated the fact that our leaders were killed. We despised the fact that innocent children were being killed, killed by Boers, killed by farmers working with the police.

ADV DE JAGER: Did you ever see Mr Palvie coming in with the police and beating people or helping the police?

MR KUNDULU: Before I went to the farm I heard that he was a policeman. I accepted that information even though I was not sure. When I found the police badges in his house, that is when I was certain that he truly was a policeman. Therefore I did not see him going into the township with the police but he worked with the police. There was proof, the badges were there.

ADV DE JAGER: What did you do with the badges?

MR KUNDULU: I threw them away.

ADV DE JAGER: When did you throw them away?

MR KUNDULU: After I had shown Danster.

ADV DE JAGER: Didn't you take it back to show it to your leader?

MR KUNDULU: No, I didn't. I just despised and loathed these badges, that's why I just threw them away.

ADV DE JAGER: Didn't you tell us you wanted to show it to your leader? I may be wrong but that was my impression.

MR KUNDULU: No, Sir, that is a mistake. I took the badges to show Ndzimeni the proof that truly this man was a policeman.

MR MAPOMA: Xolile was not the only commander of the SDU's in Cradock, is that not so?

MR KUNDULU: Please repeat your question.

MR MAPOMA: Xolile was not the only commander of the SDU's in Cradock, is that not correct?

MR MAPOMA: There were other commanders you knew apart from him, isn't it so?

MR KUNDULU: It was difficult to know the number of the commanders because certain information would be hidden from us because sometimes an SDU member would be arrested and then the way in which the police investigate the matter, the SDU member would inform the police of who the commanders were and therefore the commanders would be harassed.

MR MAPOMA: Yes, yes, what I want to find out Mr Kundulu is that Xolile Situngu was not the only commander you knew. I just want ...[intervention]

MR KUNDULU: Yes, that is so.

MR MAPOMA: Yes. Now when you came back from the mission and looked for Xolile you could not find him, did you go to Mongezi?

MR KUNDULU: No, we did not go to Mongezi.

MR MAPOMA: Did you go to any other commander of the SDU to report?

MR KUNDULU: We did not go, that's why we went to phone, we tried to phone. We decided to go and phone other comrades when we did not find him.

MR MAPOMA: When Lollie sold the goods that you found there, did you contact any commander to call Lollie into order?

MR KUNDULU: No, there is none.

MR MAPOMA: I take it that you did not call Lollie into order because you wanted your commander to deal with him but he was misbehaving and there commander was not there, why did you not get another commander to call him into order?

MR KUNDULU: I would not be able to do that, we had to wait for Xolile. He is the one who gave all the instructions. I also knew that the goods that Lollie had sold were at Xolile's house. He sold them to Xolile's brother-in-law. Even if he had not sold these goods to somebody who did not stay at Xolile's house, if Xolile wanted the goods when he arrived we would go and fetch the goods from wherever. This is why we were waiting for Xolile. It is Xolile who was going to deal with Lollie.

MR MAPOMA: Yes, but Xolile was going to deal with Lollie as a commander of the SDU's and there were other commanders to do that if he was absent. What I want to find out, why was this thing personalised to Xolile if it was done in the name of the SDU's?

MR KUNDULU: We had not been commanded by other people, we were commanded by Xolile. He started the matter, he had to finish the matter.

MR MAPOMA: Thank you Chairperson, I have no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MAPOMA

CHAIRPERSON: Any re-examination?

MR WESSELS: Thank you Mr Chairman, I have no re-examination.

NO RE-EXAMINATION BY MR WESSELS

ADV DE JAGER: Mr Kundulu, you sent a document to the TRC during last year, is that correct?

MR KUNDULU: Correct.

ADV DE JAGER: On page 21 of the bundle you state in the second paragraph

"The farmers returned unexpectedly"

Is that correct?

MR KUNDULU: What did the farmers do?

ADV DE JAGER: Returned unexpectedly, you didn't expect them when they returned.

MR KUNDULU: That is so.

ADV DE JAGER: But weren't you waiting for them? You were informed that they would be returning in the afternoon and you went down to the house to wait for them?

MR KUNDULU: Yes, we were waiting for them. We did not know the exact time when they were going to come back.

ADV DE JAGER: Then you proceed and say

"Lollie and I had to use violence to get out of the situation"

What violence did you use?

MR KUNDULU: What situation are you talking about now specifically?

ADV DE JAGER: I don't know, you're talking about the situation here.

"The farmers returned unexpectedly, they took everyone by surprise. Lollie and I had to use violence to get out of this situation and also obtain the guns"

MR KUNDULU: Miss Nonkosi wrote this application. I told her that it mixed things up because I was not inside the house. Now which violence would I have used to take myself out of this situation? I was never in any difficulty as such because I was not inside the house. There would have been no difficulty whereby I'd have to use violence. This is written incorrectly.

ADV DE JAGER: And then it goes on and says,

"We used a hammer and one of the big knives when hitting the farmer and his wife, thus killing them."

MR KUNDULU: I never began to do this because when I was

INTERPRETER: Could the speaker please repeat the answer.

MR KUNDULU: When the Boers came back from town I did not go inside the house. I told Nonkosi already that she mixed the stories up because she has written that I went inside the house and I was violent and I beat somebody up with a hammer. I did not do that, I told her, this is why the TRC - this is why we were not successful in our application with the TRC at first, it's because of the mistakes that Nonkosi made. I told her about these mistakes.

ADV DE JAGER: But this was ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Just, is it a him or a her?

MR WESSELS: It's a her.

CHAIRPERSON: You spoke to them, the person?

MR KUNDULU: ...(no English translation)

CHAIRPERSON: Nonkosi?

MR KUNDULU: Nonkosi is a lady, she's an attorney.

ADV DE JAGER: ...(inaudible) nothing about this case, isn't it correct?

MR KUNDULU: ...(no English translation)

ADV DE JAGER: Nonkosi.

MR KUNDULU: It is Nonkosi who represented up in Court. She was working together with the late Mr Xholile Majodine.

ADV DE JAGER: But now she's writing and saying, "Lollie and I had to use violence", was she's speaking to you? There can't be a mistake about who she's referring to.

MR KUNDULU: I'm trying to explain to you that our application at first was not successful because of Nonkosi's mistakes, because of the confusion that it caused in the application. She made it seem like I attacked the farmers physically, even though I was never inside. For that reason the case was not successful, the appeal - I beg your pardon, the application. It's difficult now to answer you because it's Nonkosi who has caused all this confusion and I told her about it.

MR WESSELS: Mr Chairman, could I possibly just intervene at this stage. You would notice that at page 17 of the volume of documents, which is the supportive statement, although it's not signed by the various applicants, it was just put the other way around, there we have it there, according to Danster

it would have Monwabisi and Lollie that did that, it appears to be a confusion of these two aspects. These two documents ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: It's the same version - page 17 she says it is Monwabisi and Lollie, on page 21 he, Monwabisi, is saying it's Lollie and I - it's not different versions.

MR WESSELS: No, that is exactly what I'm pointing out to you, Mr Chairman. It seems that she's just got it the wrong way around. These two documents were not signed by the applicants in their affidavits which is before the Committee as Exhibit A and B, the correct situation is set out, and Danster will also be testifying in accordance with that situation that he was in the house, and not the present applicant. So it would seem, in fairness to the applicants that the drafter of that document, which was not signed by either of the applicants, may well have just put the names incorrectly, they had it the wrong way around. Thank you, Mr Chairman.

ADV DE JAGER: You've been referred by your attorney to the letter Exhibit D, and he read to you,

"The motivation is that he responded to a call by the then band ANC" I can't make out the next word, but, "that the Youth should make our Townships a no-go area for Police and their informers"

and you agreed to that. Do you remember your advocate reading that to you?

MR KUNDULU: Yes.

ADV DE JAGER: Now I want to read the next sentence to you,

"Although they exceeded the bounds of the call, we strongly feel it was because of their political immaturity that they adopted these extreme measures."

Now, do you agree with that?

MR KUNDULU: Let me try and explain to you. First of all, that is the truth, that you cannot deny. Our leaders were harassed and killed, those were the people who would educate us politically. They did not get a chance to enlighten us and educate us well. We then perceived the political situation in a practical sense, we would try to fight and dispute the whole system in a practical sense. Our leaders were killed and harassed, that is why we also in turn kill and harassed.

ADV DE JAGER: Your leaders never instructed you to kill, they instructed you to unarm people and if you're, I would go as far as that, and if you're attacked by the people in unarming them, I think the situation could arise where you could shoot too. But in this case, why did you kill the people, and why do you say if you were in the house you would have killed them too?

MR LAX: I do repeat that, I re-iterate that I would have killed them as well if I was inside. The reason why I say so is because when I go and take weapons or disarm a white man at that time, and I am black, the white man would not just simply hand over the weapons to me, he would never give the weapons to me. I had to fight in order to disarm you. If you have to die, you die. I could not just get the weapons verbally, it is the talking that would cause that man to kill me. I would -if I had to kill to get the weapons I would do it.

ADV DE JAGER: In this instance, was there any resistance to get the weapons?

MR KUNDULU: As I said, I was outside, I did not see, but then I was told - first of all I saw Mr Palvie as a pretty strong man. Now Lollie and Danster, my co-accused, said to me that Mr Palvie started fighting Lollie and they say that there was no other way, they had to kill in order to get the arms.

ADV DE JAGER: So they killed him? So he was out of - he didn't function anymore, he was lying down, being killed. Is that correct, according to the report?

MR KUNDULU: Yes.

ADV DE JAGER: Now, what was the report, why was the woman killed?

MR KUNDULU: What I heard, she's the one who first went inside, she opened the kitchen door, went inside and then the husband followed. Apparently she went into the bedroom. She found the bedroom upside down as it had been searched. She apparently screamed for her husband, she cried out to her husband saying, come and see what the Kaffirs have done. That made them angry or even more angry. She was attacked because she called out to her husband to see what the Kaffirs had done.

ADV DE JAGER: You were standing outside, did you hear her screaming and uttering those words?

MR KUNDULU: I could not have heard her because she was inside and I was not too close to the kitchen, I was not close enough to the kitchen to hear her. I did not hear her.

ADV DE JAGER: And was that the reason why she was killed because she uttered those words?

MR KUNDULU: That's what I heard, that's what I was told.

ADV DE JAGER: So she was killed because she uttered a racist remark?

MR KUNDULU: Those words were provocative. The words were provocative, the Boers, the farmers were not only oppressive in the sense that they worked with the Police, they ill-treated their employees terribly. I will give you an example, a farmer is able to beat up a man, a father, with the children right there, and the father would cry, for no apparent reason.

ADV DE JAGER: Did Mr Palvie or Mrs Palvie do that?

MR KUNDULU: I can't say, I'm talking about farmers collectively.

ADV DE JAGER: Yes, but in South Africa we've got people murdering each other, perhaps black people murdered family of mine, but I'm not entitled to go and kill every black man then.

MR KUNDULU: At the time out perception was such that there was war. The reason why I say that a whit man, especially a farmer and a Policeman, we perceived them as big enemies, whatever the name or what they did to whom. We perceived them as big enemies collectively.

ADV DE JAGER: So I want to put it in all fairness then that you killed the Palvies because you considered them to be enemies, and it had nothing to do to get their weapons on that day, whether they had weapons or not you would have killed them because of this ill-treatment you suffered in South Africa through the hands of the whites.

MR KUNDULU: As I've said, at that time our leaders were killed and they would always say they don't know who killed out leaders. A five month old baby would die through teargas, nobody would be charged for those murders, we would just quietly bury our people. I'm trying to say to you ...(intervention)

ADV DE JAGER: I'm only trying to ascertain the reason why you killed the Palvies wasn't in order because they resisted you in getting the weapons, it was because they and the people they represented oppressed your people and killed them. Wasn't that the reason, and not the reasons you're advancing today?

MR KUNDULU: I've said that that was one of the reasons. I did not kill, but if I was inside I would have killed for the reasons that I have said, but the main intention was to get the arms. We could not exactly get to Mr Palvie and kindly request him to hand over his firearm, he was not going to do that, he was just going to shoot. He had to be attacked in some way, even if we'd beat him just to weaken him so that we can get the firearm. He was not just going to hand it over like that. I'm here to tell the truth, there was no other way to disarm the farmers, but we had to attack them somehow. We have to first attack the man and then you'd get the firearms. If you say that you're going to get there and kindly request the firearm, you're just asking for your own death.

ADV DE JAGER: You were previously sentenced for robbery, weren't you? You just came out of Court - you were out of jail, you've been out of jail for nine months when you murdered these people, or partake in the ...(intervention)

MR POTGIETER: For robbery.

ADV DE JAGER: For robbery, you've - what was your previous convictions?

MR KUNDULU: Where did I rob?

ADV DE JAGER: No, I ask you, what was your previous convictions?

MR KUNDULU: If I'm not disturbing the Committee, I'm going to request the sentences that I have served, I don't think they are connected with this matter. That's my own reasoning, I don't think those have anything to do with this matter because I was sentenced and I served those sentences. And I was sentenced by the apartheid regime. Perhaps I did not rob anyone, but they could have falsely accused me. If we're going to go to those sentences that I served, that is going to misdirect the Committee or mislead the Committee.

ADV DE JAGER: You haven't been convicted previously of a robbery, but you have been convicted - you had three previous convictions for theft, you had two previous convictions for housebreaking with the intent to steal and theft, and two previous convictions of assault with intent to commit grievous bodily harm. So you previously broke into houses and stole, isn't that so?

MR KUNDULU: Has the Committee heard my request, or does the amnesty application that I'm about here, does it have anything to do with the questions that you're asking me?

ADV DE JAGER: I must ascertain whether this was a political motive or whether you returned to your old habits of stealing and breaking into houses, that's why I'm asking you this?

MR KUNDULU: I think I've tried to explain to the Committee the reason why I'm here. According to my own understanding, the questions that the Committee is asking me, cases where I have been accused by a Government that ruled unlawfully - it's just opening up old wounds.

ADV DE JAGER: We are not going to hold this against you, those previous convictions, in the sense that because of that you're not entitled to amnesty. I only want to see what was your true motive in doing what you did, and whether it was in order to obtain weapons. And now I just want an answer on this, what would you have done if the Palvies had no weapons except the rifle you found that morning, the .22? What would you have done then?

MR KUNDULU: I have said that we went there to search and we found a rifle. When we got out I realised that Ndzimeni realised this. That's when I went and explained to him that even though we had said we'd come to his circumcision celebrations, that is not actually what we had gone there to do, we had gone to find arms. That's when Ndzimeni explained and said, if the firearms are not in the house, in the farmhouse, there should be two pistols that the white man that had gone to town used. We then waited for them to come back with the pistols. When I tried to answer your question, sir, we had gone there for weapons and Ndzimeni told us that there were two pistols. That's why we waited for these pistols, we wanted the arms and the car.

ADV DE JAGER: Right, now the one pistol you got in a bag on the table in the kitchen, is that correct?

MR KUNDULU: Correct.

ADV DE JAGER: Where did you find the other pistol?

MR KUNDULU: Lollie found the pistol with Mrs Palvie, he had the pistol.

ADV DE JAGER: With who, Mr or Mrs Palvie?

MR KUNDULU: Mr Palvie.

ADV DE JAGER: Mr Palvie, thank you.

MR POTGIETER: Mr Kundulu, can I just ask you, in this connection the bag that was in the kitchen in which you found the other pistol, what kind of bag was it, was it a ladies bag or what kind of bag was it?

MR KUNDULU: Ladies bag, the one you sling over your shoulder.

MR POTGIETER: And that was the pistol that you had when the Police found you?

MR KUNDULU: Yes.

MR POTGIETER: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: First I'd like to go back to the question of the statements that Mrs Nonkosi prepared on your behalf. In both these statements that she prepared, it was on the basis that you and Lollie were in the house, searching the house when the farmers returned unexpectedly. Was that the true position?

MR KUNDULU: No, that's not what happened.

CHAIRPERSON: And the statements went on to say that this took everybody by surprise and that you and Lollie had to use violence to get out of the situation, and you used a hammer and a knife killing them.

MR KUNDULU: No, that is not correct.

CHAIRPERSON: She got - she was the attorney who was acting for you, you told us, throughout your trial?

MR KUNDULU: Yes, that is so.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Now, on your present version, Lollie and Ndzimeni ran into the house to get into the house before the farmer and his wife could get back?

MR KUNDULU: They went into the house, Lollie and Ndzimeni, when the car was coming.

CHAIRPERSON: So they were in the house when the farmer and his wife returned?

MR KUNDULU: I am trying to explain, sir, when the car was coming, we ran, it was myself, Lollie and Ndzimeni. Lollie and Ndzimeni both went into the house before the car could park, it was coming at the time.

CHAIRPERSON: That's all I asked you, they were in the house before they returned, perfectly simple. And the house was a shambles, I gather, you'd searched it, you'd thrown things on the floor. You'd been searching it for three or four hours.

MR KUNDULU: That is so.

CHAIRPERSON: And they were there expecting two armed people to return to the house, because you believed they had two guns with them?

MR KUNDULU: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: So they must have attacked them as soon as they saw them, giving them no chance whatsoever?

MR KUNDULU: As I've already said, that they would not ask them or tell them that we are here now, we are asking for your weapons. They were supposed to attack them, that is true.

CHAIRPERSON: Not say, put your hands up, lean against the wall so they could search them? So they were just supposed to attack them, not supposed to disarm them? Is that what you're telling us?

MR KUNDULU: Even if they said to them, they told them to lift their hands, they wouldn't do that. They were supposed to attack them so that they can get the weapons. They were supposed to attack them.

CHAIRPERSON: Right, now I want to - your counsel asked you about Mongezi Nelani, and you said you knew him very well.

MR KUNDULU: Yes, I knew him.

CHAIRPERSON: What did you know him as?

MR KUNDULU: I knew him as a member of the SDU.

CHAIRPERSON: Was he a friend of yours, were you on good terms with him?

MR KUNDULU: No, he was the comrade, he was my comrade, because comrades get along, we got along.

CHAIRPERSON: I'm asking you this because in the judgement which you counsel has no doubt discussed with you, the court says, "Accused no 1", and you were accused no 1, weren't you, at the trial?

MR KUNDULU: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: "Accused no 1 said that Mongezi Nelani, a dangerous criminal whom he feared, but is now deceased, instructed him and accused no 4 to accompany accused no 2 to the farm Leeukloof."

MR KUNDULU: ...(no English translation)

CHAIRPERSON: That's what you said at your trial, that Mongezi Nelani is a dangerous criminal whom you feared. Was that true?

MR KUNDULU: To answer that question, I was supposed to say that because at that time I was not telling the truth during my trial. Even if I told the truth the courts at that time were racist, even the judge was also racist. To prove that the judge was racist he sentenced me 20 years for housebreaking. That shows that the judge was racist. I was supposed to speak like that.

CHAIRPERSON: It was housebreaking with intention to rob and murder, not ordinary housebreaking. We go on now, "And accused no 4," who was Lollie - oh no, sorry, accused no 2, who was Lollie, do you remember he gave evidence at the trial where he said he was a young child who acted in fear of you, whom he considered to be a cruel and vicious man, do you remember him saying that?

MR KUNDULU: Yes, I know about that, I know that he said that in court. I don't blame him for saying that because he knew that whatever he said, that court that we were testifying in was not acceptable to us because it was a racist court.

CHAIRPERSON: How long had you been out of prison when you committed this offence, when you killed these people? Is it correct you had been out of prison for only nine months?

MR KUNDULU: I can't remember.

CHAIRPERSON: How long had you been in prison for? What sentence had you just served?

MR KUNDULU: When?

CHAIRPERSON: Before you were released, and then committed this killing. You see, we have the judgement which says that you have these previous convictions that you've been asked about and that the - this office was committed a mere nine months after you'd been released from prison. Now I want to know how long you had been in prison for. We can of course obtain the SAP69 if necessary.

MR KUNDULU: I have been arrested by the Boers many times because I was fighting against the Boers or I was offending the Boers ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Kundulu, I think I must tell you, in the light of what you have said I think we should get a copy of your previous convictions so we can see what offences you committed and who were the victims, your counsel will be given a copy. You're now not prepared to say how long you had been in prison, because it is relevant as to how active you had been as a member of the STE? You can't tell me, you're not prepared to tell me, is that the position?

MR KUNDULU: I can't remember, sir. I don't know whether now it's a big problem that I can't remember this.

CHAIRPERSON: You know that your co-applicant had just been released nine months before, at about the same time as you, from serving a 12 year sentence for robbery with aggravating circumstances, did you know that?

MR KUNDULU: Am I here to be reminded of my previous sentences, about my co-accused and myself? I don't know what's going on now here.

CHAIRPERSON: Because it is relevant in assessing why you went there. As Mr de Jager has said, you went there with a boy of 14 and a boy of 15, where these offences were committed, is that correct?

MR KUNDULU: How does it come together with this case, because now this raises questions within me as well about the Committee.

CHAIRPERSON: Because ...(intervention)

MR KUNDULU: How does Mr and Mrs Palvie's case go with my previous cases that I had been sentenced for?

CHAIRPERSON: Has you counsel read to you the list of goods that were stolen?

MR KUNDULU: I would like to ask the Committee how this case of Mr and Mr Palvie goes hand in hand with cases that I'd been sentenced for previously?

CHAIRPERSON: Because we have to determine whether this was a political case with a political objective, or whether it was another case of robbery, theft - or perhaps we'll take the adjournment now and your counsel can read to you the list of articles on schedule, the schedule to count 4, if he hasn't already consulted with you on that. We'll now adjourn till 14h00.

HEARING ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION

MONWABISI ERIC KUNDULU: (s.u.o)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Kundulu, have you had an opportunity of looking at the list of articles attached to the charge sheet?

MR KUNDULU: Yes, I got it.

CHAIRPERSON: Apart from the motorcar there are 45 articles that were taken, including a lot of clothing, do you agree?

MR KUNDULU: Yes, I saw them.

CHAIRPERSON: It appears that all sorts of things were stolen from that house, cigarette lighters, pens, tools, clocks, matters of - cassettes, things of that nature. Do you agree?

MR KUNDULU: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.