Amnesty Hearings

CHAIRPERSON: Good morning everybody. Yesterday when we came to the end of the proceedings we had concluded with the evidence of Mr Msizi and I believe today we'll be commencing with the evidence of Mr Cishe.

MR NTONGA: I confirm that Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Cishe do you wish to take the oath or do you wish to make an affirmation?

PHAKAMELE CISHE: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Ntonga?

EXAMINATION BY MR NTONGA: Thank you Mr Chairman.

Mr Cishe, when and where were you born?

MR CISHE: I was born in Port Elizabeth, 9th September 1967.

MR NTONGA: And were you at you any stage a member of PAC?

MR CISHE: Yes I became one of them in 1986 just before I joined APLA.

MR NTONGA: When did you join APLA?

MR CISHE: I joined APLA in 1990.

MR NTONGA: Were you recruited to APLA or not?

MR CISHE: Yes.

MR NTONGA: Who recruited you?

MR CISHE: My commander, Mr Jabu Mdunge.

MR NTONGA: Having joined APLA in 1990, what happened to you?

MR CISHE: I went for training in Transkei.

MR NTONGA: Do you know where exactly in Transkei?

MR CISHE: Yes.

MR NTONGA: Where?

MR CISHE: In Sterkspruit.

MR NTONGA: In what were you trained in Sterkspruit?

MR CISHE: I was trained on how to use the guns and how to use the grenades.

MR NTONGA: And who trained you in the Transkei, do you still remember?

MR CISHE: Yes I do remember.

MR NTONGA: Who trained you?

MR CISHE: Mr Jabu Mdunge.

MR NTONGA: Where you the only one who had been trained or the other people coming and going in the camp?

MR CISHE: There were other people who were also receiving training.

MR NTONGA: For how long did you remain in this camp in Sterkspruit?

MR CISHE: Six months.

MR NTONGA: Thereafter, where did you go?

MR CISHE: We came back to Port Elizabeth. We were four.

MR NTONGA: Can you name the four please and the rank if possible?

MR CISHE: I don't know their ranks but it was Jabu Mdunge, our unit commander, his deputy was Mongesi Tegata and Kwanele Msizi, myself Phakamele Cishe.

MR NTONGA: When you got to Port Elizabeth, did you carry out any missions?

MR CISHE: Yes.

MR NTONGA: Do you remember when was your first meeting? first operation, I'm sorry.

MR CISHE: Yes I do remember.

MR NTONGA: When was it? During which year?

MR CISHE: It was in 1990, 18th November.

MR NTONGA: Who was involved in this operation?

MR CISHE: The four of us, the unit I have mentioned before.

MR NTONGA: What operation did you undertake on that day?

MR CISHE: We shot policemen.

MR NTONGA: Do you know who many did you shoot?

MR CISHE: At that time the only police that I've noticed that were in the vehicle were three.

MR NTONGA: Before undertaking the operation, did the unit do something in order to facilitate the carrying out of the operation?

MR CISHE: What happened before we went to this operation, we met, we gathered together on how to do this operation. We had plans but firstly we had to have a car.

MR NTONGA: So you'll steal a car in order to do the mission?

MR CISHE: Yes.

MR NTONGA: Tell the Committee, just tell me, who went to steal the car before this particular mission?

MR CISHE: It was Kwanele Msizi and Jabu Mdunge.

MR NTONGA: And where were you and Tegata?

MR CISHE: We didn't go, we were left behind.

MR NTONGA: And then tell the Committee, having stolen the car, what happened? When did you go out to look for the policemen, during the day, during the night?

MR CISHE: It was night time.

MR NTONGA: How were you armed? Do you still remember?

MR CISHE: We had AK47s, each and every person. We had hand grenades in the cubbyhole of the car.

MR NTONGA: And then you went out. What happened?

MR CISHE: We went searching for the police in our locations in the Black townships. We were exactly looking for the ones who were patrolling in our townships because people had problems with the policemen. They were causing problems to the people.

MR NTONGA: Yes, you went out looking for them, their location. What happened?

MR CISHE: After a long time whilst we were searching for them we noted a van which was coming from Julie and we were on our way from Goyana next to the ...[indistinct]. That van went through Spondo, it was the police van, then we followed.

MR NTONGA: Did you ambush it somewhere in the location? If so, in which street if you still remember?

MR CISHE: Yes we did ambush the van in Mahoman Street.

MR NTONGA: How did you attack it?

MR CISHE: We waited for it to be nearer and then when it came closer we shot at it whilst we were inside the car and it moved slowly and then we get out of the car and shoot it. We were shooting at the people who were in the front seat of the car.

MR NTONGA: Did you yourself shoot?

MR CISHE: Yes I did.

MR NTONGA: Having done so, what happened thereafter?

MR CISHE: After that we went off.

MR NTONGA: To where?

MR CISHE: We went to dump the car near the power station.

MR NTONGA: After this mission, were you involved in another mission with the same unit?

MR CISHE: Yes there is.

MR NTONGA: Do you still remember the date and the year?

MR CISHE: Yes I do.

MR NTONGA: When was it?

MR CISHE: It was in 1990, 26th December.

MR NTONGA: Who was involved in this mission?

MR CISHE: The same unit that carried out the first operation.

MR NTONGA: And where did you meet the police this time?

MR CISHE: We met the policemen at Katu Street.

MR NTONGA: Was there some firing between you and the police?

MR CISHE: Yes, yes there was some firing.

MR NTONGA: Can you remember who started to fire in your group or the police group?

MR CISHE: We started shooting.

MR NTONGA: I see. Do you know whether people were injured in this shooting?

MR CISHE: Yes I heard about that. Whilst I was arrested and I read that from the paper as well.

MR NTONGA: During these two operations that you've mentioned, under whose orders did you take them?

MR CISHE: Our commander, Jabu Mdunge.

MR NTONGA: And these two operations, for which aims or objectives of a political organisation were you doing them?

MR CISHE: We under the military wing of the PAC, APLA. We were fighting the past regime in order for it to notice that the Africans, meaning Black Africans of this country want the country back to their owners because it's been a long time that the Boers have been ill-treating our people, killing them senselessly without any reason, so we were also doing this to ungovern the regime and that the government will notice that we also feel what they are doing because to talk couldn't help.

MR NTONGA: Okay. Did you personally gain anything from these operations?

MR CISHE: No, I didn't gain anything.

MR NTONGA: In the criminal trial you were also convicted for the theft of six cars. Did you gain any benefit from the theft of those cars?

MR CISHE: No.

MR NTONGA: And why were the cars stolen?

MR CISHE: We were stealing the cars to carry out our operations.

MR NTONGA: Do you know what happened to your commander and deputy commander?

MR CISHE: Yes I do.

MR NTONGA: What happened to them?

MR CISHE: They were killed by policemen.

MR NTONGA: And you yourself and your co-applicant were arrested and tried and convicted?

MR CISHE: Yes.

MR NTONGA: In your applications, you have three applications that you made to the TRC, do you still remember?

MR CISHE: Yes I do.

MR NTONGA: Is it correct that the first one was made in Xhosa and made by you?

MR CISHE: That is correct.

MR NTONGA: Is it also correct that after submitting that one there were queries and you were advised to give more information about these operations and name names if possible?

MR CISHE: Can you please repeat your question, sir?

MR NTONGA: After you have submitted your Xhosa application, you were asked by the TRC to resubmit them, give more information and name names if possible. Remember that?

MR CISHE: Yes that is correct.

MR NTONGA: And that is why there was a second application that was submitted on your behalf, to meet those queries, is that correct?

MR CISHE: That is correct.

MR NTONGA: And the last application, who visited you in jail in this last application, that would be the one 23 February 1997?

MR CISHE: It was Michael Kashimba.

MR NTONGA: In your Xhosa application, page 15 Mr Chairman, 15 of the bundle.

CHAIRPERSON: Is it not page 31 Mr Ntonga? I think - isn't 15 Mr Msizi's one? I think it's page 31.

MR NTONGA: I'm sorry. I getting confused with 35, I'm sorry.

CHAIRPERSON: Does yours appear on page 35?

MR NTONGA: 35 - at 11(a) and (b).

The answers you gave in those - the replies you gave to those questions was that you acted under the auspices of the APLA although you were not given a direct instruction. Is that correct?

MR CISHE: What happened exactly is this. In the first application form, there was first a mistake because in everything that I was doing I was doing under the instruction of the APLA.

CHAIRPERSON: I just think for the record purposes the question 11(a) is on page 35 and then the translation on the record is on page 37(e).

MR NTONGA: Your co-applicant was asked about your witness in the criminal trial court, Elliot, do you remember that man giving evidence in your trial?

MR CISHE: Yes, I can remember that person who was giving evidence there.

MR NTONGA: What he said at the trial, was that the truth?

MR CISHE: No it was not the truth because he also said that he was told by the police to say it that way, that's what he said in the Supreme Court.

MR NTONGA: Did you know him before?

MR CISHE: No I didn't

MR NTONGA: Thank you Mr Chairman. That is the evidence.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR NTONGA

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Griebenow, do you have any questions to ask this witness?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR GRIEBENOW: Thank you Mr Chairperson.

Mr Cishe, you say that you were recruited by Mr Mdunge to join APLA, is that correct?

MR CISHE: That is correct.

MR GRIEBENOW: When were you recruited by Mr Mdunge?

MR CISHE: It was in 1990.

MR GRIEBENOW: Was it the beginning of the year, was it toward the end of the year or the end of the year? Do you know, can you remember?

MR CISHE: I don't remember when it was but it was in 1990.

MR GRIEBENOW: Very well. Where did you meet him when he recruited you?

MR CISHE: I met him here in Port Elizabeth.

MR GRIEBENOW: Can you remember where in Port Elizabeth did you meet him?

MR CISHE: In the township.

MR GRIEBENOW: Can you remember where in the township did you meet him?

MR CISHE: Yes I do remember.

MR GRIEBENOW: Can you please tell us?

MR CISHE: It was in kwaZakhele.

MR GRIEBENOW: Can you tell us where in kwaZakhele, Mr Cishe?

MR CISHE: It was in Njoli.

MR GRIEBENOW: Was it in Njoli Plain that you met him?

MR CISHE: Can you please repeat your question sir?

CHAIRPERSON: Could you repeat the question please Mr Griebenow?

MR GRIEBENOW: Was it at Njoli Plain where you met him?

MR CISHE: No.

MR GRIEBENOW: Mr Cishe would you tell us exactly where in Njoli did you meet him?

MR CISHE: We met in the square.

MR GRIEBENOW: How did it happen? When you saw him there, did he come to you, did you go to him? What exactly happened?

MR CISHE: Nobody went to one another but he met me at N Njoli, I was chatting with other people, with party programmes. He came in as well because he was also one of the party members. He also joined our chatting, so that's how we met.

MR GRIEBENOW: Very well. What did you talk about?

MR CISHE: I cannot exactly remember what exactly we were talking about because it was a long time ago.

MR GRIEBENOW: Was it at that stage that he recruited you to join APLA?

MR CISHE: Not exactly at that time.

MR GRIEBENOW: So at what stage did he recruit you to join APLA?

MR CISHE: Another time because we met afterwards.

MR GRIEBENOW: Yes, but my question is at what stage was that? I accept that it happened at another time, Mr Cishe, but when exactly, what stage, when did he recruit you?

MR CISHE: It was still in 1990 but I cannot remember the month.

MR GRIEBENOW: Where did this happen Mr Cishe?

MR CISHE: Njoli Street because it's where we're always gathering, in Njoli.

MR GRIEBENOW: Now please tell the Committee how did it happen, what were you guys talking about when you got recruited for APLA?

MR CISHE: There were many things that we were discussing there but I cannot clearly remember but what I'm sure of is that I was interested in joining the Army.

MR GRIEBENOW: So did you then tell Mr Mdunge that you were interested in joining APLA and did this happen in Njoli?

MR CISHE: Yes, I told him there.

MR GRIEBENOW: Very well. What other arrangements were made in order for you to receive your training?

MR CISHE: After that I went to Transkei where I received my training.

MR GRIEBENOW: Mr Cishe can you tell us when you were recruited you said that you were interested in joining APLA, is that correct?

MR CISHE: Yes I was interested in joining the APLA, that's correct.

MR GRIEBENOW: Did you tell Mr Mdunge that you wanted to join APLA?

MR CISHE: Yes I told him myself.

MR GRIEBENOW: After you had told him that you wanted to join APLA, what did he say what did you have to do? What other further arrangements did he make for you to join APLA?

MR CISHE: What I can remember is this. He told me if I want to be an APLA member it's very easy to join because I've already met APLA.

MR GRIEBENOW: Were arrangements made as to where he would meet you so that you could go for training?

MR CISHE: There were no arrangements made for me and him to meet except that we had to go because he was leaving there and then.

MR GRIEBENOW: Was it at that stage, when you told him that you wanted to join APLA, did Mr Mdunge take you from Njoli to Sterkstroom where the training camp was?

MR CISHE: Yes that is correct.

MR GRIEBENOW: So directly from Njoli you went to Sterkstroom, or Sterkspruit?

MR CISHE: Yes, we left there and then.

MR GRIEBENOW: How did you get from Njoli to Sterkspruit?

MR GRIEBENOW: There are taxis in Njoli.

CHAIRPERSON: We know there's taxis there but how did you get to Sterkspruit? Did you go in a taxi?

MR CISHE: There was a taxi that took us from Njoli to Sterkspruit and then we got a lift afterwards.

MR GRIEBENOW: With your arrival in Sterkspruit where did they take you?

MR CISHE: They took me to the camps.

MR GRIEBENOW: Did they take you to camps or to one specific camp?

MR CISHE: They take me to the camps where there were tents.

MR GRIEBENOW: Where exactly were these camps in relation to Sterkspruit?

MR CISHE: They were in Sterkspruit.

MR GRIEBENOW: In the town itself?

MR CISHE: Camps can't be inside the town.

MR GRIEBENOW: Well Mr Cishe, that is why I asked. In relation to the town of Sterkspruit, where were these camps?

MR CISHE: They were outside of town.

MR GRIEBENOW: Where outside the town? Was it in the outskirts of the town, in other words close to the town or far away from the town?

MR CISHE: Inside Sterkspruit but not in town.

MR GRIEBENOW: And with your arrival at the camps, what happened then?

MR CISHE: I was taken to Stemiso Ngonoba.

MR GRIEBENOW: Yes continue please?

MR CISHE: I was introduced to him. Afterwards I got training, I was trained. The next thing they - I didn't know their further discussions but I was taken to a training session.

MR GRIEBENOW: Directly after your arrival there you were introduced to the person there and after you were introduced to this person directly thereafter you went to a training session, is that correct?

MR CISHE: I was taken to the tents that were nearer the camps, in the camps. Afterwards, after a certain period or time I was taken to this training session.

MR GRIEBENOW: With how many people did you share a tent?

MR CISHE: There were many people inside those tents in so much that it's very difficult to count how many people were in one tent.

MR GRIEBENOW: How large were these tents?

CHAIRPERSON: What is the object of this Mr Griebenow? Do we need to know how big the tents were or is it leading to something? If your cross-examination is leading to a specific point where you're going to dispute then I have no difficulty but if not, do we really have to know how big the tents were and precisely where they slept etc in training?

MR GRIEBENOW: Mr Chairman, it's my submission that it comes down to the credibility of this applicant because I possess a document that I would hand in later regarding the so-called training and where this training took place.

CHAIRPERSON: Well as long as it's leading to somewhere.

MR GRIEBENOW: As it pleases you.

Do you know how many people slept with you in the tent?

MR CISHE: As I said, I don't know the number but there were many of us.

ADV. BOSMAN: Can't you say approximately how many people?

MR CISHE: It's very difficult because I was not there to count numbers, I just went there for training.

MR GRIEBENOW: Mr Cishe, for the full duration of six months did you stay in these tents while you were undergoing training?

MR CISHE: Yes.

MR GRIEBENOW: How many persons was in your training group?

MR CISHE: In our group there was lots of people but when we went out of the camps we were only four.

MR GRIEBENOW: During this period of six months did you receive training with the group that you were part of? Is that correct?

MR CISHE: Yes, they were also there, amongst the people who were also getting the very training session that I was receiving.

MR GRIEBENOW: Mr Cishe can you tell us please, can you mention a few names of people who were in this training group of yours other than Mr Mdunge and your co-applicant and the other person who was with you in Port Elizabeth?

MR CISHE: The other people who were there I don't know their names because it was very difficult to know people personally, their names exactly in the camps of the liberation movements.

MR GRIEBENOW: Mr Cishe, what you tell is that although you trained for six months in a training group with certain persons and you shared a tent with them but you don't know any of their names?

MR CISHE: Because I didn't go there to know their names. I went there for training only. To know someone else's name it's something else.

MR GRIEBENOW: From your answer can I draw an inference that you never got to know any of the other persons names in that camp?

MR CISHE: There are no other names.

MR GRIEBENOW: Mr Cishe, to come back to the application forms that you completed, you already told the Committee that you completed three applications, is that correct?

MR CISHE: That is correct.

MR GRIEBENOW: The first application that was completed by you was in English during April 1996, is that correct?

CHAIRPERSON: I think he said in his evidence that the first application that he completed was in Xhosa, I think that's what he said but you can ask him again.

MR GRIEBENOW: As you pleases you Mr Chairman.

Mr Cishe, I put it to you that the first application that you completed was in English and it's on page 38. Do you confirm it as such, Mr Cishe?

MR CISHE: I can't say I confirm that or not because I don't remember whether I made it in Xhosa or in English. I've been in prison for a long time so my mind cannot think clearly.

MR LAX: Well maybe your lawyer can help you Mr Cishe. Just have a look at page 40, look at the bottom of the page. You'll see your signature and you'll see the date, 16 April 1996. Is that your signature?

MR CISHE: Yes.

MR LAX: That application is the first one that you filled in, if the date is correct, and that one is in English. Do you confirm that?

MR CISHE: Yes I can see that it's written in English.

MR LAX: Please continue, Mr Griebenow?

MR GRIEBENOW: Very well you say that, or let me ask you this first, the information in this first application was information that you gave yourself. Do you confirm that the answers that you gave here to the questions asked is correct?

MR CISHE: The answers that I wrote in my first application form, I would say they are true but there is a mistake that is why the TRC brought the application form back and they had a complaint about my application.

MR GRIEBENOW: Mr Cishe, what I'm trying to find out from you is that when you completed these answers to these questions was it, to the best of your knowledge, was it correct? Is that right?

MR CISHE: I wanted to answer the questions truthfully but a mistake happened in this application form.

MR GRIEBENOW: How did this mistake happen?

MR CISHE: I can't explain how it happened but it happened.

MR GRIEBENOW: We'll get back to that, but after this application you completed a second application in May of 1996 in Xhosa, is that correct?

MR CISHE: Yes that is correct.

MR GRIEBENOW: And this second application, did you complete it because you did not give enough information in your first application?

MR CISHE: I was trying to do something like that.

MR GRIEBENOW: And am I correct when I say that both the first application form as well as the second application form was completed by you? Did you do this on your own, you did not have any legal counsel helping you, is that correct?

MR CISHE: Yes, I filled them myself because a lawyer was far away for him to come at that time but he did come after some time.

MR GRIEBENOW: With your third application did you have the assistance of legal counsel? This was the last application.

MR LAX: If you look at page 30 Mr Cishe, you'll see the date and the signature, 23rd February 1997.

MR GRIEBENOW: It was Michael Kashimba who was helping me.

CHAIRPERSON: Who was Michael Kashimba? Was he an attorney or an Advocate or a legal man?

MR CISHE: He's a member of the PAC.

MR GRIEBENOW: Very well. What is Mr Kashimba's rank?

MR CISHE: I didn't ask him.

MR GRIEBENOW: To get back to your application form, I would like to refer to the answers that you gave on two questions, 11 paragraphs (a) and (b) of your application. Let's start with the application form that you handed in first, the one dated the 16th April 1996, page 40. To question 11(a) you answered in the following way and I will read

"I was never assigned by the organisation but I did

something which I thought it would be beneficiary to the oppressed masses and on top of that I didn't expect any remuneration from anybody. I furthered the APLA armed struggle."

The information as it is given in this answer of yours, is that correct?

MR CISHE: I did write this but everything that is done by a soldier, a soldier doesn't do that by himself, a soldier does something under orders.

MR GRIEBENOW: Mr Cishe, let me ask you the question once again. I'd just like to know, the information that you gave in your answer here, do you confirm it as correct?

MR CISHE: I am saying I did write this myself. It is my own handwriting.

MR GRIEBENOW: Mr Cishe, I accept it, is this the truth that is written here, what is written here in your own handwriting, is that the truth?

MR CISHE: What I wrote down here is the truth but there were orders that were given.

MR GRIEBENOW: Could I refer you to paragraph (b) of question 11, would you look at the answer you gave there? Do you see it?

MR CISHE: Yes I do see it.

MR GRIEBENOW: What you have written here in your own handwriting, is that the truth that you wrote down there?

MR CISHE: It is not the truth, it is where I made a mistake because I was doing this under orders.

MR GRIEBENOW: Very well, Mr Cishe, that is my point, either you did it under orders or you did it without any orders. Both these instances cannot be truth, is that correct?

MR CISHE: Yes that is correct.

MR GRIEBENOW: And what you wrote here is a lie then if your evidence is correct here today, is that correct?

MR CISHE: This that you showed me here is not the truth because I did this following orders.

MR GRIEBENOW: Mr Cishe, that is my point. If it is not the truth then you gave a misconception here to the TRC Amnesty Committee and by giving this answer you tried to mislead them, is that correct?

MR CISHE: I wasn't trying to mislead them. First of all what should be noticed here is that I spent a lot of years in prison and I'm from the death row and it plays a part in someone's mind so you must consider those facts because there are a lot of things that I'm thinking about, so anyone can make a mistake, such a mistake. It is not something that you can hold on and say that I did this on my own, I was not following orders.

MR GRIEBENOW: Mr Cishe you didn't answer the question but I will leave it at that. I would like to proceed to your second application form. According to you, you made a mistake in the first application form. Let's go to your second one, on page 35. Once again it's the same question put to you and you had to give an answer to it. Would you like to have a look at the answer that you gave to question 11(a)? This is the application in Xhosa.

MR CISHE: Yes I can see that.

MR GRIEBENOW: The answer that is written down there, is that the truth?

MR CISHE: This answer that is written down here, I can also say that I was following orders because everything that I did at that time, I followed orders. I was not commanding myself, I was under command.

MR GRIEBENOW: Once again, Mr Cishe, you are not answering my question. The question is simple, the answer to question 11(a), what you wrote down here in Xhosa is that the truth? A simple yes or no answer would suffice.

MR CISHE: It is the truth because I was a liberation fighter but I was doing this under orders.

MR GRIEBENOW: Mr Cishe, the answer to paragraph 11(a) is that you used your own initiative, you acted on own initiative, is that correct or is it not correct?

MR CISHE: It is where I made another mistake again during the second operation.

MR GRIEBENOW: Is that also a lie or a mistake?

MR CISHE: A mistake is different from a lie.

MR GRIEBENOW: Is this a lie then because it's not the truth.

MR CISHE: I've already said that it is a mistake.

MR GRIEBENOW: Let's look at paragraph (b) of the same question, your answer to that, can you have a look at it please?

MR CISHE: This is the same mistake that happened to the first application form that I made.

MR GRIEBENOW: Mr Cishe, I want to put it to you, I put it to you categorically that this is not a mistake. Either it's a deliberate lie or it was the truth.

MR CISHE: Why do you think that it is a lie?

MR GRIEBENOW: Mr Cishe, I'm not going to answer your questions. All I want to put to you is it's very coincidental that whilst you completed your first two application forms you mentioned that you received no instructions, you received no instructions when these incidents took place, the ones you are applying for amnesty for, but only after you were seen by a senior APLA official who helped you to complete the third application form, then you suddenly mention that now you were under instruction. What is your comment on that?

MR CISHE: What I'm saying is, I was doing this following orders. Even if you can change this, but I was following orders because even my commander was present when I was doing this, he was also there, he was also taking part.

MR GRIEBENOW: Mr Cishe, I'm going to move away from this point, I'm going to move onto the incidents themselves, the ones you are applying for amnesty for. Is it correct that one of the vehicles which was stolen was a blue Ford Granada and it was parked in front of Grand Bazaars at a parking area, is that correct?

MR CISHE: That is not correct.

MR GRIEBENOW: You and your co-applicant, did you at any stage steal a Ford Granada which was parked in a parking area at Grand Bazaars?

MR CISHE: I didn't steal a Ford Granada, I didn't steal with him.

MR GRIEBENOW: At no stage whatsoever? Never?

MR CISHE: That is correct.

MR GRIEBENOW: Mr Cishe, in your trial in Supreme Court, evidence was presented coming from a magistrate, Magistrate Pienaar, and that you would have made a statement to him. Can you remember that?

MR CISHE: Yes I do remember that. I saw papers like this from my lawyer that was representing me in that court case and he had this statement and they said that I made this statement to Mr Pienaar, he was the one who was in the Supreme Court. He was also in Louis le Grange and we were told to tell him our complaints. He was together with another inspector that I don't know. When I was reporting to him or giving him my complaints about my assault, after that I would be taken again and assaulted again. What is written here is what I was told by someone else who was also arrested, was being brought by the police. I then saw this in the Supreme Court and I was told that it is a statement that I made. Yes it is true that I made a statement because I told them that yes, we did shoot the Boers, not what is written here, because I told them in Supreme Court that what is written down here is what was done by the Boers in Louis le Grange so that they can satisfy their needs because they were dirty people themselves.

MR GRIEBENOW: Mr Cishe, let's get to the point, what I want to know from you is, at any stage did you take a statement at Magistrate Pienaar's office at this High Supreme Court?

MR CISHE: What I'm saying is, I made a statement to the police and I told them about us shooting the Boers. What I did to Mr Pienaar, I laid a complaint and that made me to be taken back to the offices and to be assaulted again.

MR GRIEBENOW: Mr Cishe, so you did make a statement to Mr Pienaar in his office?

MR CISHE: I didn't make a statement to Mr Pienaar, I made a statement to the police.

MR GRIEBENOW: So you never made a statement to Mr Pienaar which he then put in writing, is that what you're saying?

MR CISHE: Let me put it this way, Mr Pienaar was part of the police who were investigating. I never made a statement to him.

MR GRIEBENOW: You are aware of the fact that the Judge who was in the Supreme Court and who was judging the case, despite the fact that you denied the fact that you made this statement to Mr Pienaar, his finding was that you did indeed make this statement and it's on the grounds of this statement that he found you guilty?

MR CISHE: He was a white judge, he was working together with these Boers because as I was the way I was, I was supposed to die. He then found me guilty so that I could be hanged in Pretoria. He was serving your interests as white people.

MR GRIEBENOW: Mr Cishe, once again ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, I didn't get that last translation, the last bit it was crowded out by the noise, could you just repeat it please?

INTERPRETER: He was serving your interests as white people.

MR GRIEBENOW: Mr Cishe, as so many times before, you are not answering my question. My question is very simple, is it correct to say that the Judge in the High Supreme Court found that you did indeed make a statement to Magistrate Pienaar which he put into writing and that you, amongst other things, you were convicted because of that statement by the Judge?

MR CISHE: I don't know how he would have found me guilty because of those things but he did say that he found me guilty because of what was written in that statement.

MR GRIEBENOW: Chairperson, my attention has been fixed to the idea that it's already eleven o'clock.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes it's eleven o'clock. We'll now take a short tea adjournment.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION

PAKAMILE CISHE: (s.u.o.)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes thank you, Mr Griebenow you may continue.

MR GRIEBENOW: (continued) Thank you Chairperson.

Mr Cishe, I just want to get clarity regarding this point. Am I correct if I say that despite the Supreme Court's finding, you still deny that you made a statement to Magistrate Pienaar?

MR LAX: Sorry, just put your mike on please?

PHAKAMELE CISHE: (s.u.o.)

It's not like as you are saying it.

MR GRIEBENOW: Can you then tell us what is the position?

MR CISHE: It's as I've said to you.

MR GRIEBENOW: So you did not make a statement?

MR CISHE: I only submitted a statement to the policeman.

MR GRIEBENOW: Your co-applicant, is he also known to you as Zamikaya?

MR CISHE: He knows me as Phakamele.

MR GRIEBENOW: I will repeat the question ...[intervention]

MR LAX: Sorry. Please can you try and answer the questions? It really would help us. We spend a lot of time going backwards and forwards, backwards and forwards. This is your application and you've got to try and help us. So please, we'd really appreciate it if you would just try and answer the questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Can you repeat the question please, Mr Griebenow?

MR GRIEBENOW: Do you also or rather your co-applicant, is he also known to you as Zamikaya?

MR CISHE: No.

MR GRIEBENOW: The two persons who were with you at your co-applicant in the unit and who operated together with you, these two people, are they also known as Vele and Zamukolo?

MR CISHE: No, it's not like that.

MR GRIEBENOW: Chairperson at this stage in order to help the Committee, I'd like to make available a statement and I want it to be handed in and it should be Exhibit B.

Mr Cishe, I'm now going to ask you questions with regard to the alleged statement you made to Magistrate Pienaar and it serves as Exhibit B. According to this statement you during November 1990, you met two males at Vuku Street scrap yard where they were residing. It's on page 7 of Exhibit B.

MR CISHE: Please repeat your question?

MR GRIEBENOW: In Exhibit B, page 7, eight lines from the bottom, the statement mentions that in Vuku Street at a junk yard you met two male persons and this happened during November 1990. If you look at page 6 of Exhibit B, the very first line. What is your comment on that?

MR CISHE: I met these people there. Every time, whenever I want to meet them as long as they were still there. So it's not only this, it's not a question of one day that I met them there.

MR GRIEBENOW: You see the point I'm trying to make is, according to this statement, this would have been the first time that you met these people and you were introduced to them, you never knew them beforehand.

MR CISHE: I say it's not like that.

MR GRIEBENOW: According to page 8, Exhibit B, just below the middle part of the page, you declare allegedly that Zamikaya told you that you were going to receive training from these two people and it's going to be nice and these two people would then also provide you with firearms. What is your comment on that?

MR CISHE: I'm saying it's not correct as you are saying it or reading it.

MR GRIEBENOW: On the same page of Exhibit B, further on, on that same page, you also declare or the statement says that that these two people in Vuku Street scrap yard, they were asked if they do not know of a way of making money or how they could get hold of money. Were these people asked these questions.

MR CISHE: I never asked such questions or I was never asked such questions.

MR GRIEBENOW: Did someone else ask the people this in your presence?

MR CISHE: No it never happened in my presence.

MR GRIEBENOW: Then I want to go to page nine of Exhibit B, the eighth line from the bottom. According to what is written there, these two people who you met at the junk yard or the scrap yard, they would have told you at that stage that they wanted to go out to go and shoot police officers and that was the first opportunity when you were told that that was in fact what they wanted to do. How would you comment on that?

MR CISHE: There is no such a thing.

MR GRIEBENOW: Still with Exhibit B, still on page 9, the very last sentence and then also continuing onto page 10, I'd like to put this to you and I'm going to read it to you. This is now after they told you that they wanted to shoot police officials and I quote

"We agreed to do that and we did not want to argue with them. We were scared that they'd get difficult towards us. We left them and we told them we'd see them later."

What could you say about that?

MR CISHE: There is no such a thing.

MR GRIEBENOW: Also in Exhibit B, page 11, the third sentence from the top and here we refer to the first attack on the police. You declare that you only fired one shot at the police and the weapon you had shook you and you didn't shoot any further because you were scared that the firearm might injure you. What do you say to that?

MR CISHE: There is no such thing.

MR GRIEBENOW: During the second operation, were you present when the vehicle was stolen which you wanted to use for that operation?

MR CISHE: Yes I was present in the car.

CHAIRPERSON: The question Mr Cishe was, were you present when the vehicle that was used in the second operation was stolen. At the time that it was stolen were you present?

MR CISHE: Yes.

MR GRIEBENOW: The vehicle which was stolen for use in the second attack on the police, this vehicle, was it stolen at Happy Valley?

MR CISHE: Yes that is correct.

MR GRIEBENOW: And the vehicle which was stolen at that time, was it a Cortina Big 6?

MR CISHE: Yes that is correct.

MR GRIEBENOW: And was Kwanele with you when you stole this vehicle?

MR CISHE: No, he was not present.

MR GRIEBENOW: Who was present?

MR CISHE: It was myself and Mongesi.

MR GRIEBENOW: This vehicle, after you and Mongesi stole it, was it searched, did you go through it, look through it?

MR CISHE: No, we didn't have time to do that.

MR GRIEBENOW: Any of the other vehicles which were stolen, were they searched?

MR CISHE: No we were not doing that.

MR GRIEBENOW: Were any of the vehicles which were stolen taken apart and sold?

MR CISHE: No.

MR GRIEBENOW: Did you work during November 1990?

MR CISHE: What do you mean by work?

MR GRIEBENOW: Were you employed, did you receive a salary?

MR CISHE: No.

MR GRIEBENOW: How did you get by, how did you live?

MR CISHE: I was under my parents house, they were helping me in everything that I need.

MR GRIEBENOW: Your co-applicant - well let me ask you this - at the time of these operations which were performed by you and your colleagues, were you then resident in your parents' house, were you residing there?

MR CISHE: Yes I was still residing with my parents but sometimes I wouldn't be at home, I would be where we got arrested.

MR GRIEBENOW: Yes, okay but your residential address was your parents' house at that stage, is that correct?

MR CISHE: Yes that is correct.

MR GRIEBENOW: Your co-applicant, Mr Msizi, during these operations which you performed, you carried out, where did he stay at that time?

MR CISHE: He's got his own home, he was staying with the parents which means he was also staying with the parents.

MR GRIEBENOW: Is there any reason why you and your co-applicant did not stay at the base with the other two members of your unit, that is in the scrap yard, why didn't you stay with them?

MR CISHE: As we were instructed by our commander we were not allowed to be in the same place, four of us, two were supposed to be somewhere and the other two to be on another place, but we were meeting during the planning of the operation or during the course of the operations.

MR GRIEBENOW: Mr Cishe, I'd like to put it to you that my argument at the end of the day would be that you did not tell the whole truth to this Commission today. My argument would be that you never received training in Sterkspruit like you've said, that you and your co-applicant were merely coincidentally involved in these attacks on the police and that you took part in the theft of the vehicles and you did this for financial gain and furthermore, that your part in the attack of the police officials was directed only in order to obtain firearms from the people you were with in order to make it easier or in order to create the opportunity for you and your co-applicant to get money easily. What is your comment to that?

MR CISHE: That it's not true and it will not be like that.

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

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR GRIEBENOW

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Griebenow.

Mr van der Merwe, do you have any questions to ask the witness?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR VAN DER MERWE: Thank you Mr Chairman.

Mr Cishe, let's start with the APLA structure in which you served. Who was Mr Mdunge's boss or head? Who was the person in control or who did he report back to?

MR CISHE: It was Jabu Mdunge.

MR VAN DER MERWE: No, please listen to the question, the question is who did Jabu report back to?

MR CISHE: I don't know whom he was reporting to.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Do you not know or do you not want to make a full disclosure to this Committee today?

MR CISHE: I don't know and I didn't know, not that I don't want to tell the Committee. I came here to tell the truth.

MR VAN DER MERWE: The orders which you say Mr Mdunge gave to you, where did these orders come from?

MR CISHE: I don't know where he was getting the orders.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Do you not know if these orders came from anywhere?

MR CISHE: No, I didn't know where he's getting the orders from.

MR VAN DER MERWE: You were never told, is that correct?

MR CISHE: No, I wouldn't be told because I was in the lower ranks.

MR VAN DER MERWE: If I tell you that these operations were executing orders which were given to APLA operatives under the Commander Jabu would that be correct or not, was that the way you acted?

MR CISHE: That is correct.

MR VAN DER MERWE: You added an addendum on page 43 and page 44 in the bundle. Can you page to those pages please and I refer you paragraph 6(ii). Could you please read that paragraph for us and you can read it loud so that it can go on record, please?

MR CISHE: Do you want me to read it loud?

MR VAN DER MERWE: Yes please.

MR CISHE

"The operations were carried out in execution of orders given to Apla operatives and under the unit commander, Jabu, who received the orders from his superiors in the APLA structure."

MR VAN DER MERWE: Now, Mr Cishe, this is an addendum which was added to your applications, is that correct?

MR CISHE: That is correct.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Now please tell us, who are the superiors in the APLA structures you refer to or who is being referred to?

MR CISHE: I don't know their names, I never saw them, but I believe that Jabu, as a soldier, he must have got orders from somewhere as I was receiving my orders from him.

MR VAN DER MERWE: It's not so easy, only a short while ago you said that you did not know if he received instructions or not so how can you tell your legal representative to write down things like that if you did not know if he received instructions or not?

MR CISHE: What I'm saying is, Jabu, I don't know where he got orders from, whether he got them or not I can't explain that but as a soldier there must be place where he got his instructions.

ADV. BOSMAN: I just point this out to you, I wrote down that his initial answer was that he didn't know where he got his instructions from so there's a difference there.

MR VAN DER MERWE: I heard the word whether, but I'll accept it like that, thank you Chairperson.

Do you know if you received instructions or not?

MR CISHE: According to my knowledge a soldier receives orders from his superiors, that is why I believe that he also got orders from his superiors.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Mr Cishe, you do not answer the question, the question is simple. Do you know if Jabu received instructions, it's a simple yes or no answer.

MR CISHE: I didn't know that he was receiving orders but according to my knowledge as a soldier I think he should have got instructions from somewhere.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Why did he have to get instructions from somewhere?

MR CISHE: Each and every soldier gets his instructions.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Cishe so I take from your answers you don't know whether Jabu got instructions for your unit to carry out an operation on the 18th November and then again got further instructions to carry out an operation on the 26th December or whether there was a general instruction to attack police or whatever. Do you know whether there was a general instruction or whether there were specific instructions for each operation.

MR CISHE: I received an order concerning these operations.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr van der Merwe?

MR VAN DER MERWE: Thank you Mr Chairman.

You see, Mr Cishe, I don't understand it quite well. Please assist me, the sentence says specifically:

"The unit commander, Jabu, who received the orders from his superiors."

Where does that information come from?

MR CISHE: It is how I know the rules of the soldiers because a soldier gets orders from somewhere.

MR VAN DER MERWE: It's not that easy. Look at the sentence it says ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: I think, aren't we getting into a question of argument now, Mr van der Merwe, he said that as far as he's concerned he assumed that his commander was getting instructions from further above. This wasn't written by the applicant it was written by probably his legal representative. Mr Chairman, yes, with the greatest of respect, but paragraph 6.2 says "the" operations were carried out, "the" operations which he is applying for under unit commander Jabu who received "the" orders.

CHAIRPERSON: But now you're saying that he assumed that he received the orders. I mean you can cross-examine him for four days on this.

MR VAN DER MERWE: I will leave it there, thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: That's why I say it's basically a question of argument.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Are you aware of any of the commanders above Jabu, of their identity?

MR CISHE: No, there are no commanders that I knew except for him.

MR VAN DER MERWE: When you received your training at Sterkspruit, who was in charge of this training there?

MR CISHE: The person who was there was Stemiso Ngonoba.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Is he still alive?

MR CISHE: No.

MR VAN DER MERWE: When did he die?

MR CISHE: I can't remember when he died.

MR VAN DER MERWE: If you just turn back to page 43, paragraph 4. Were your instructions given to you specifically to attack the police who were patrolling the Port Elizabeth black townships?

MR CISHE: That is correct.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Can you explain why the previous applicant then indicated how they were driving all over Port Elizabeth including to Louis le Grange Square to look for targets?

MR CISHE: We are supposed to put it that way because we couldn't find the police in black townships. Then our commander who was the one who gave us an instruction to go to town.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Right, you say that your operations were carried out with the aim of overthrowing the apartheid regime, is that correct?

MR CISHE: That is correct.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Can you explain how killing two white policemen who is on crime prevention duty, how that will help you to overthrow the apartheid regime?

MR CISHE: First of all, I want the Commission to know this, our killing these police was not the only operation, we were going to go on doing the same thing.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr van der Merwe, I think it's a bit unfair to take this literally, I mean obviously they didn't or no person could think that by shooting a police van in Port Elizabeth is going to overthrow the whole government. I mean it was - I mean to take that line wouldn't we just be wasting time?

MR VAN DER MERWE: Mr Chairman, but that is their justification that they have forwarded in his application.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes but it's just a way of speaking, I mean if somebody says I didn't act, I threw a hand grenade through a window and I did it to overthrow the regime, one doesn't take it literally, one takes it as that person's endeavour to contribute towards the struggle in overthrowing the regime so I think if you can ask along that line, I mean we're not going to, I can tell you now, we're not going to be convinced that a person, because every application we hear, we sit in, just about, we hear that the people did it in order to overthrow the regime, that was their final objective to be part or to defend the regime. I mean if a policeman shoots somebody in a township and he says I was doing it to defend the regime, I mean that act is not the only defence, so to take it literally I think is not really being fair, but you can question him on it but we're not going to find because he put that there that he thought that or they thought that they were going to overthrow the regime because it's ridiculous.

MR VAN DER MERWE: I will rephrase the question, Mr Chairman.

What did you think killing these two policemen would achieve.

MR CISHE: We knew that the government was losing people, was losing people who were defending him because the police were defending the government together with the soldiers as South African Defence members. They were protecting the government, so by attacking them first, we would be removing the obstacles or the supporters of the government who were doing those things so that the government can see that people who were defending the government were being attacked.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Was your initial intention not to attack members of the South African Defence Force?

MR CISHE: Yes, if we came across them we were going to attack them.

MR VAN DER MERWE: So then your, the statement that you made to the magistrate at the bottom of page 9 is correct where it says

"We wanted to shoot members of the Defence Force because they were also soldiers"?

MR CISHE: Please repeat your question, sir?

MR VAN DER MERWE: I say in other words the statement that you made before Magistrate Pienaar where you say at the bottom of page 9 of Exhibit B that the other two persons wanted to shoot members of the Defence Force because they were also soldiers, is that correct?

DR TSOTSI: Is that a fair question to the witness? Didn't the witness say that he didn't make a statement to Mr Pienaar, before Mr Pienaar? Now you are saying because there is something there in that statement before you which corresponds with what the witness says now that he must have made the statement before Mr Pienaar.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Dr Tsotsi, through Mr Chairman, I do think it's a reasonable question, I think the applicant should be in a position to answer that. He is in a position to deny or admit that.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, he can answer it.

MR CISHE: What I would like to explain to you is that what is written in this statement is what was written by Pienaar. I never made a statement to him, so what is written down here in this statement is far from me. Yes you can ask me questions about other things but it would be difficult for you to get an answer from me about what is written here in this statement because I told the police that arrested us concerning these operations.

MR VAN DER MERWE: I'll ask the question in another manner. The set up of the two members who lived in this scrap yard, was it their intention to attack members of the Defence Force?

MR CISHE: I can't answer for them.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Was there no plans to attack members of the Defence Force?

MR CISHE: We had already made plans because they way we were operating, it was very clear that even if we meet a police or a soldier we would attack.

MR VAN DER MERWE: So in other words Mr Cishe you say that there were plans to attack members of the Defence Force although you didn't execute any of those operations?

MR CISHE: Let me answer you this way, if we didn't meet these police, if we met the soldiers we would have attacked them because they were doing the same job as the police.

MR VAN DER MERWE: And did you plan to go out and look for soldiers as well?

MR CISHE: We only searched in the townships and in town, there was no other way that we did.

MR VAN DER MERWE: My question is did you plan to go and look for Defence Force members to shoot them?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr van der Merwe, he has answered the question, he said essentially "we planned to go out and attack agents of the government, if we came across police we would attack them, if we came across soldiers we would have attacked them as well. In essence that was their plan.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Can I then infer Mr Cishe, that you didn't have anybody in mind but any agents of the government was your target?

MR CISHE: Anybody who supported the government was in big trouble at that time.

MR VAN DER MERWE: If you have a look at page 43 of the addendum of the record, the name Jabu Madinge, is that a spelling fault? It has to be Mdunge?

MR CISHE: Yes it was supposed to be Mdunge.

MR VAN DER MERWE: And also in the first paragraph. This training camp at Sterkspruit where you received your training. Whose property was it?

MR CISHE: I don't know whose property was it.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Was it a farm or a house, what was it?

MR CISHE: It was not a house but it was an open space. I don't know whether it was a farm, but it was not a house.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Was it just an open space of property in a field, no houses or anything close by?

MR CISHE: There were no houses close by.

MR VAN DER MERWE: How far was the town from there, were there any buildings?

MR CISHE: I can't estimate how far they were but they were far.

MR VAN DER MERWE: You couldn't see any other people from where you were?

MR CISHE: No.

MR VAN DER MERWE: And if we could page to your application page 38, can you tell me whose handwriting is that, who filled in the application?

MR CISHE: It's my handwriting.

MR VAN DER MERWE: And we have a look at page 31, whose handwriting is that there? Does that look like your handwriting, is that correct?

MR CISHE: That is correct.

MR VAN DER MERWE: And then Mr Cishe, have a look at page 11. You are not even paging there. Whose handwriting is that?

MR CISHE: It's my handwriting.

MR VAN DER MERWE: And would you confirm that it is the application of Mr Kwanele Msizi, is that correct?

MR CISHE: That is correct.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Now why did you fill in Mr Msizi's application form, can you explain this to us?

MR CISHE: He asked me to help him.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Then the idea you had no instruction, that was your opinion in this whole operation or was it both of yours?

MR CISHE: In fact your honour, this appeared when we were completing this form. I don't know how to explain this or how to put it but it was a mistake.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Mr Cishe, you had no problem in understanding the form, did you?

MR CISHE: Please repeat your question, sir?

MR VAN DER MERWE: You had no trouble in understanding the form that was printed in Xhosa to understand this application form.

MR CISHE: No I didn't have a problem.

MR VAN DER MERWE: And then in paragraph eleven where they specifically ask if this was an instruction or not and in paragraph (a) and (b) it's clear that in both applications of yours and Mr Msizi's you wrote that there was no instruction, is that correct? That is what you wrote there?

MR CISHE: Yes I did write this but it was a mistake.

MR VAN DER MERWE: No sir, just afterwards you realised that the truth that you wrote there was a mistake and that is why you tried to change it and why you can't explain it today because whether one acts on an order is a simple question, one cannot make a mistake about that. What is your reaction to that?

MR CISHE: We repeated this because the TRC brought back the application form, it was not satisfied. We then decided to put it in the right way because even when we were putting it for the first time, we thought it was the right thing but we were making a mistake.

MR VAN DER MERWE: I would like to put it to you that you filled in both these application forms so that you both had the same story to tell the Committee here today and that you are not telling the truth here.

MR CISHE: That is not correct. What you are saying that I wrote these forms because we wanted to tell the same story? I can say that yes, we were doing the same things outside so there was no other way we could put this because we were involved in the same operation. The fact that I'm not telling the truth is not correct.

MR VAN DER MERWE: When you describe your action as "I acted the normal way of APLA", can you explain what you mean by that?

INTERPRETER: Please repeat your question sir?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr van der Merwe could you please repeat your question for the interpreter?

MR VAN DER MERWE: I will do so Mr Chairman, I will repeat it in English for the benefit of the interpreters.

When you described your actions as "I acted the normal way of APLA", what did you mean by that?

MR CISHE: I don't think you should pursue that matter because it was a mistake and that's what I'm telling you here, that is why we rectified or we wrote again, we rectified that mistake.

MR VAN DER MERWE: I would appreciate it if you could answer that question please, Mr Cishe. What do you mean by saying "I acted the normal way of APLA"?

MR CISHE: I did this because of I believed in the way that APLA was operating, I knew how APLA was operating but it was a mistake, not for me to explain here that I was under orders.

MR VAN DER MERWE: If you say you knew the way that APLA was operating, what way were they operating, what were you referring to?

MR CISHE: I'm saying this way, the way that I also operated.

MR VAN DER MERWE: What way is that Mr Cishe? You still haven't answered the question.

MR CISHE: Shooting of the police.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Are you saying that was APLA strategy or the normal way to shoot police?

MR CISHE: Yes it was the normal way of APLA at that time.

MR VAN DER MERWE: But then it is possible that you did not have an instruction to kill the policemen because you just acted the normal way, isn't that so?

MR CISHE: That is not correct because we were with our commander. He was the one who was giving us instructions on what to do.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Yes Mr Cishe and today your commander is dead so you can't tell us what the truth is.

MR CISHE: You also wouldn't dispute what I'm saying, you can't say I'm telling you a lie.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Was there in any other way you could resist the regime of the past to overthrow the government or did you have to kill policemen?

MR CISHE: In our unit that's how we operated.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Is it correct to say you were not interested what a specific policeman was doing, you did not care, he died simply because he was a policeman, is that right?

MR CISHE: Please repeat your question, sir?

MR VAN DER MERWE: Any policeman would have been a target, it did not matter to you whether he was a person sitting in an office doing filing or whether he was a person involved with the security police for instance, if he had to be the person driving past in a police vehicle you would have killed him, is that right?

MR CISHE: As long as he is a policeman or a soldier.

MR VAN DER MERWE: So even if a policeman wasn't supporting the political party or the government of the day, it was still possible for you to kill him? If he was just doing a job, if he was just doing a job of fighting crime, you would still have killed him, is that true?

MR CISHE: That is correct because that policeman would die because of the sins of other policemen.

MR VAN DER MERWE: One moment, Mr Chairman? Thank you Mr Chairman.

Was your objective in these attacks to kill white policemen only or any policemen?

MR CISHE: A police is a police whether you've black or white, if you are a police you are a police.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Well let me ask you this way, your political goal that you tried to achieve by killing the policemen, what was that?

MR CISHE: I think I've told you before, I've answered that question, that we were removing the police because they were an obstacle, they were supporting, they were pillars of the government.

MR VAN DER MERWE: How many vehicles were you involved with in stealing, how many vehicles were you personally involved with in stealing?

MR CISHE: I stole two cars.

MR VAN DER MERWE: What happened, the first car, which one was that?

MR CISHE: It was the Cortina in which I was arrested about, it was found the same day.

MR VAN DER MERWE: And when were you arrested?

MR CISHE: It was towards the end of November in 1990.

MR VAN DER MERWE: And that was before the police knew where to go and look for your comrades, is that right?

MR CISHE: Please repeat your question?

MR VAN DER MERWE: That was before the shoot-out at the scrap yard, is that correct?

MR CISHE: No, that is not correct.

MR VAN DER MERWE: No, it is clear that it was. Where did the police get the information that your unit commander was at the scrap yard?

MR CISHE: When I was giving them a statement, when I was telling about our killing of the Boers, they wanted to know where others were. Our unit commander said if we were arrested, myself and Msizi, we were supposed to send them where they were so that the police would go there in numbers so that they can attack them in numbers if they are there to look for them.

MR VAN DER MERWE: So you did tell the police where they could find your unit commanders, is that what you're saying?

MR CISHE: Yes I told them.

MR VAN DER MERWE: And there was no way you could warn your comrades that the police were coming?

MR CISHE: No there was no way but all the times they were ready for anything that could happen because we also expected or we were ready for whatever what would happen.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Right the second vehicle that you stole, where was that? Where did that happen and when did it happen?

MR CISHE: The second car is the one of the second operation.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Were you convicted directly in the Supreme Court on the counts of murder, on the counts of attempted murder and on the counts of motor vehicle theft? In other words, did you do it?

MR CISHE: Please repeat your question, sir?

MR VAN DER MERWE: With other words, did you do all the things you committed or convicted of?

MR CISHE: I did, but I was convicted for, but the three cars that we put in by the police were also convicted for those cars and that led for these cars to be six cars and we didn't know about the other three cars but because we were convicted for them we do not care now about those cars.

MR VAN DER MERWE: So how many cars did you steal?

CHAIRPERSON: When you say you, are you talking about the applicants before the court?

MR VAN DER MERWE: Let me rephrase that, Mr Chairman, you say you were referring to you only stole three cars are you referring to yourself or to yourself and the other co-applicant? I beg your pardon, two cars.

MR CISHE: In the two cars I'm referring to myself and Mongesi.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Did you apply for amnesty for the theft of six cars?

MR CISHE: Yes, I made that application for those cars because I was convicted for those cars and I didn't know what to do about them because I'm also convicted but I'm convicted wrongly for those cars.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Cishe are you saying that as far as the unit's concerned, there were only three vehicles? The two that you were involved in and one other because there was a vehicle - you say the vehicle that you were arrested in at the end of November, was that the same vehicle used in the first operation or not?

MR CISHE: No.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay so then you've got the vehicle that was used in the first operation, the vehicle that you were arrested in at the end of November and then the vehicle used in the second operation. Are those the three vehicles you say were involved? When I say you, the unit was involved and you say the other three, the police just put in there, you don't know about those other three?

MR CISHE: I don't know anything about the three cars.

ADV. BOSMAN: Can I just follow up on that Chair? The first car which you were not involved in the stealing, did you know that they were going to steal the car?

MR CISHE: We knew that when we going to an operation there was supposed to be a stolen car.

ADV. BOSMAN: When you colleagues went out to steal the car, you knew they were now going to steal a car, is that correct? They told you "look we are going to steal a car and then we'll go into the operation" is that what happened?

MR CISHE: They would tell us when we were going to steal a car, we they were going to steal a car.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Thank you Mr Chairman.

Now apart from the two cars you stole yourself how many other cars do you know of that your unit went and stole? Does that make six altogether?

MR CISHE: I've explained this that the cars that we were involved in at three, as the whole unit.

MR VAN DER MERWE: So yourself, including your co-applicant Mr Msizi, including Jabu and the other Mongesi, the four of you were only involved in three car thefts, is that what you are telling us today?

MR CISHE: The two of us were involved in stealing two cars and the two of us were involved with stealing one car.

MR VAN DER MERWE: I think the interpretation is not maybe hundred percent correct. What you're saying is the two of you, that is yourself and Mongesi, were involved in the theft of two cars, is that correct?

MR CISHE: Yes.

MR VAN DER MERWE: And then your co-applicant Msizi and Jabu were involved in stealing one more car which is three cars all together. Is that correct?

MR CISHE: That is correct.

MR VAN DER MERWE: And the other three cars that you were convicted of stealing, you have no knowledge whatsoever and neither do any of your unit members have any knowledge of those cars?

MR CISHE: I don't know anything about those cars. It's like this statement, it happened the way this statement happened.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Then Mr Cishe, to prove to you how you are adapting your evidence and that has been happening the whole time, I want to refer you to page 29 of your final draft application for amnesty and paragraph (iv) on the top and I will read it to you

"On the 11th November 1990, we embarked on an operation where we stole six cars that we were using in our operation of attacking white policemen of which three of them died."

Now surely your legal advisor could only have got that information from you?

MR NTONGA: Sorry Mr Chairman, the form was not completed by the legal advisor.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes this form was not through the legal advisor it was from the member of the Pan African Congress who assisted him.

MR VAN DER MERWE: My humble apologies to my colleague. Whoever filled this form in, I think his name Kashimba, Mr Kashimba who filled it in, could only have got this information from you, sir. Now why would you ask for amnesty for three cars that you know nothing about?

MR CISHE: It is because I knew that I would explain about these cars here.

MR VAN DER MERWE: No, sir. You said "we stole six cars".

MR CISHE: Yes, I'm not denying that, I said that in my application but I knew that I would get a chance to come here and explain about what happened.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Did you read this amnesty application of yours before you signed it?

MR CISHE: Yes I did.

MR VAN DER MERWE: And you were happy with everything that was written in here, that's why you signed it, is that correct?

MR CISHE: Yes I was happy with that, what was written here.

MR VAN DER MERWE: And you are today saying to us that when there is written "we stole six cars" that that is not the truth, do you confirm that?

MR CISHE: As I've already said, I knew that I would get a chance here to explain to the Commission about these cars, not that I was lying here, I was not lying. You're pushing me, you want this to appear as if I was lying.

MR VAN DER MERWE: You also say in the same paragraph

"In our operation of attacking white policemen of which three of them died".

That is also not correct. Do you confirm that?

MR CISHE: I stole three cars. As the unit we stole three cars.

CHAIRPERSON: I think the question Mr Cishe, Mr van der Merwe said to you, you say in that statement

"We stole six cars that were used in our operation of attacking white policemen of which three of them died"

Now what Mr van der Merwe says is that statement saying that you attacked white policemen of whom three died is wrong as well because we've heard in the evidence now that two white policemen died and a further person who was not a policeman also died, nor was that other person a white person.

MR CISHE: Are you asking about white policemen?

MR VAN DER MERWE: No sir, I'm just saying your form that you filled in and the facts that you supplied to the Truth Commission was false and incorrect.

MR CISHE: Are you saying they are false?

MR VAN DER MERWE: That is correct sir.

MR CISHE: What I'm saying is they are true.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Let me just ask you, Mr Kashimba, where did you see him, were you in jail, did he come to visit you?

MR CISHE: Mr Kashimba is the person who visits us in jail and I knew him from the PAC.

MR VAN DER MERWE: From where did you known him?

MR CISHE: Here in Port Elizabeth.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Where in Port Elizabeth did you see him or meet him?

MR CISHE: In the location.

MR VAN DER MERWE: And in what capacity did you meet him, was it at a meeting or just socially or how did you meet him?

MR CISHE: I met him in a taxi.

MR VAN DER MERWE: What is his surname?

MR CISHE: Kashimba.

MR VAN DER MERWE: What is his first name?

MR CISHE: Michael.

MR VAN DER MERWE: And his Xhosa name?

MR CISHE: We didn't use his Xhosa name we were using the name Michael.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Right, so you knew he was a fellow comrade of APLA, is that correct?

CHAIRPERSON: He said he was a member of the PAC, I don't think - you can ask whether he was.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Was he a member of APLA as well?

MR CISHE: I know him as a member of the PAC, I don't know whether he was a member of APLA or not.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Was he a member of the PAC before you?

MR CISHE: I don't know.

MR VAN DER MERWE: When you met him - when did you meet him for the first time?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr van der Merwe, are we disputing that Mr Kashimba did this, filled this in and that he's not a PAC member or otherwise what's the point where he met him, whether it's in a taxi or on the Square at Njoli, what is the difference?

MR VAN DER MERWE: It is quite evident that Mr Kashimba had quite a decisive role in filling in these applications ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Yes he said so.

MR VAN DER MERWE: and I am trying to find out what his role was and what his position in APLA is, Mr Chairman, because - in PAC is...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: But where he met him and whether it was in a taxi or what, you can ask him what his position is, we don't have to go through all this fine detail as to when and where unless you're disputing that he came to the jail and helped him, assisted him with the form.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Mr Chairman, it's because of the fact that the applicant is not assisting in trying to tell us what position he fills in the PAC, he wants the Committee to believe that he does not know what this person's rank or status is in the PAC and I find it totally unacceptable.

CHAIRPERSON: Right carry on but please get to the point.

MR VAN DER MERWE: What position does Mr Kashimba have in the PAC, Mr Cishe?

CHAIRPERSON: I don't know his rank or his position in the PAC.

MR VAN DER MERWE: You've said after you've filled in your - it's one more question Mr Chairman, you've said after you've filled in your first application that you were asked for more information in your applications, is that correct?

CHAIRPERSON: Please repeat your question?

MR VAN DER MERWE: You said that after you filed your first application the Truth Commission asked you to supply them with more information, is that correct?

MR CISHE: Yes that is correct.

MR VAN DER MERWE: What other information did they want?

MR CISHE: Places where this operation took place and the name of the policemen, the one whom we killed and the one who got injured during the operations.

MR VAN DER MERWE: You see Mr Cishe, I struggle to understand this as well because in your first application, paragraph 9, you supply all the relevant information, so it was supplied, all of it. But when we look at paragraph 9(b) you indicate there that there are former state police who died with their informer who was sitting between them in the police van, yet when you supply more information to the Truth Commission, you tell them that three white policemen died. How did this happen?

MR CISHE: Will you please repeat your question.

MR VAN DER MERWE: I said, if you compare the pages on page 39 of the record there, paragraph (b), you say there that there are former state police died with their informer who was sitting between in the police van and others were injured, referring to both your operations. Can you see that?

MR CISHE: Yes.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Now how does it happen that when you supply the Truth Commission with more information that there is now three policemen who died?

MR CISHE: It's because I was including the informer, that's why I was saying three of them died.

MR VAN DER MERWE: It is quite clear that he was not a policeman but I will tell you why you changed it to policeman because you weren't sure that you will get amnesty if you shot someone who you didn't have a reason to shoot. That is why you've changed him to a policeman, sir. Isn't that so?

MR CISHE: I'm not scared of saying that I shot that person even though he was not a policeman because I found out afterwards that he was not a policeman and I'm not scared of that because I know that the people who were sitting in between the police, what kind of people they were.

MR VAN DER MERWE: On Page 29 of the record or your application number three, you also say that at paragraph 3 one car was burnt. Can you enlighten us as to the car that was burnt because I haven't heard you or the first applicant give any evidence in that regard?

MR CISHE: The car was burnt in the first operation near the power station.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Who burnt it?

MR CISHE: Mongesi.

MR VAN DER MERWE: You heard the evidence of applicant number one, Mr Msizi, he says the car was abandoned, not burnt?

MR CISHE: I'm sure you didn't ask him exactly what happened about the car.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Yes we did ask him exactly what happened about the car, Mr Cishe, he said the car was abandoned, he also went further to say that all the cars were abandoned. That means left, where you leave it and you turn your back and you walk away from it. Do you have any comment?

MR CISHE: It is because he was supposed to say that we abandoned or left the car because you didn't ask details whether we left in a right condition or what.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Thank you, Mr Chairman, I've no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VAN DER MERWE

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Ms Patel do you have any questions?

MS PATEL: I do, thank you Honourable Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Would this be a convenient time to take the lunch adjournment, I see it's just about 1 o'clock. It's just about 1 o'clock, we'll at this stage take the lunch adjournment and we'll resume at 2 o'clock.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION

PAKAMILE CISHE: (s.u.o.)

CHAIRPERSON: Good afternoon. As you know we're starting late now because we had to evacuate the hall. I'm informed that the premises have been searched and it's immediate environs and that we may now proceed. When we adjourned for lunch, Ms Patel was about to ask the witness, Mr Cishe, some questions. Ms Patel?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS PATEL: Thank you Honourable Chairperson.

Sir you've been questioned at length regarding the authorisation or instructions you would have received. Now when you were in training, did you receive any training in terms of the hierarchy and how that would function in terms of you carrying out your operations?

MR CISHE: I can explain it this way. We were trained for hit and run. In artillery level, I was not trained for that, only for hit and run.

MS PATEL: So was it never to you that if you undertook an operation this is how you needed to go about planning that these are the people who you were able or entitled to take instructions from? Was there no policy in terms of that?

MR CISHE: No, we were never told whom to take the instructions from except that we knew that we were taking our instructions from our commander.

MS PATEL: And how would you know that he was the person that you were able to take instructions from, was that told to you whilst you were in training or did you just assume that?

MR CISHE: He himself told us that we are under his command, we are in his unit and he is our commander, that's what he told us.

MS PATEL: Were there any guidelines that were set in terms of what type of orders you were supposed to take from him?

MR CISHE: He's the only one who was explaining everything to us as soldiers. They had to obey and take the instructions as they were given by the commander. We had to listen to what he was saying and do it.

MS PATEL: Would you be entitled to carry out an operation without instructions from a commander?

MR CISHE: No.

MS PATEL: Then just to go back, you've been questioned at length in terms of Section 11 of the application form and your explanation for the changes that were made to the forms was that you were responding to queries from the TRC, is that correct?

MR CISHE: Yes there were some changes or amendments.

MS PATEL: But were they in response to queries from the TRC, is that your evidence?

MR CISHE: It was some of the things that we'd take note of because we would have seen that it needed some amendment because our advisor gave us some advise as well.

MS PATEL: I'm sorry, I don't understand. Are you saying that the amendments that were made were in response to advice that you received from your advisor or are your saying that the amendments were made as a result of the queries that you say were forwarded to you by the TRC?

MR CISHE: We didn't change because we were advised by our legal advisor but he told us what was required by the TRC as our form was brought back to us.

MS PATEL: Are you saying that the last form in which you were assisted that the changes made in terms of that was as a result of the queries that the legal advisor or the person who had come to see you had given to you or as a result of queries that came from our offices, from the TRC offices? I just need clarity on that.

MR CISHE: We realised ourselves the mistake that I've already explained before you. We were then told what was required by the TRC, we were told why the form was brought back. I don't know whether I'm answering your question.

MS PATEL: Okay so you're saying at the end of the day that the changes or amendments that were made or additions that amendments, additions that were made were as a result of the queries that were received from our TRC offices?

MR CISHE: Yes that is correct.

MS PATEL: Okay can you recall when these queries came through to you?

MR CISHE: I don't remember when it was but our forms came back, but I don't remember when that was.

MS PATEL: Are you saying ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, I was just going to ask Mr Cishe, you say your forms came back, did they come back with any letter from the TRC or did you just get the forms back?

MR CISHE: These forms came and we were told that the evidence was not enough, that was written there.

CHAIRPERSON: Were you told that by the prison authorities or who gave you the form?

MR CISHE: Our forms came with a lawyer.

MS PATEL: Which lawyer was that?

MR CISHE: Mr Ntonga.

MS PATEL: And when was this?

MR CISHE: I can't remember when it was.

MS PATEL: Was it this year or last year, the year before? Can you not generally just give us a general estimation of when these forms came to you with Mr Ntonga?

MR CISHE: It is very difficult for me to estimate because there are a lot of things that are happening but I don't want to estimate.

MS PATEL: That's fine, are you saying though that - can you recall whether it was Mr Ntonga then, given that he was the one you say who came with the forms, was he then the one who assisted you with the final application form that forms part of the bundle that has the amendments on it that has caused so much of concern here?

MR CISHE: Mr Ntonga brought the last application form.

MS PATEL: And that is not the application form that forms part of the original bundle, that is a form that was forwarded to our offices last week only. That is not a form, I put to you, that was the subject of the cross-examination here today, that that form was handed in very, very late, not last year, I mean not the year before even.

MR CISHE: Please repeat your question?

MS PATEL: I'm putting to you sir, that the form that Mr Ntonga assisted you with is a form that was then only forwarded to our offices last week, it is not the form that has formed the subject of the cross-examination to yourself today.

MR CISHE: Are you telling me or are you asking me?

MS PATEL: I'm putting it to you.

MR CISHE: I don't know.

MS PATEL: Mr Ntonga, perhaps you can just place before your client the last form that was sent in that's not a part of the bundle but that was in fact handed in afterwards? That is what I am referring to.

CHAIRPERSON: We don't have a copy of that, is that correct?

MS PATEL: You do Honourable Chairperson.

MR LAX: Are these the affidavits you are referring to? Okay. That's not a form as such, that's an affidavit rather. Maybe that's what's confusing the witness.

MS PATEL: Okay sorry, I didn't hear, okay.

CHAIRPERSON: You see what we've got is an affidavit in a bound cover. Is this the form, Mr Ntonga, that Ms Patel is referring to? So this isn't an application form?

MR NTONGA: No, not at all.

CHAIRPERSON: This is not an application form.

MS PATEL: Okay, no I'm sorry I phrased it incorrectly.

MR LAX: I see that your colleagues are indicating they've never seen that document. Just perhaps, you can have my copy. Maybe you shouldn't have my copy, I've got a whole lot of notes all over it. It wouldn't be advisable.

CHAIRPERSON: Here's another one.

MS PATEL: Okay thanks. What I'm putting to you sir is that Mr Ntonga didn't assist you with the application forms that were tendered to the TRC last year and the year before that. What I'm putting to you is that ...[intervention]

MR NTONGA: Mr Chairman, with your permission, can I clarify the position?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes certainly, Mr Ntonga.

MR NTONGA: The form for Mr Cishe, Mr Msizi were submitted just at the same because we consulted them with Mr Mbandazayo at the same time. Where that form is I don't know.

CHAIRPERSON: You're saying that there is an application form in a typed version equivalent to Mr Msizi's one which is on record but also for Mr Cishe?

MR NTONGA: Yes, for Mr Cishe.

CHAIRPERSON: But that's not in the bundle.

MR NTONGA: It's not in the form.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes we don't have it here.

Ms Patel, what Mr Ntonga is saying is if you take a look at Mr Msizi's application form on page 1 of the bundles, that is a typed form that was prepared with the assistance of Mr Ntonga and on our copy it says that it was received by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission on the 17th December 1996 and he says that at the same time that he submitted this form, he submitted a similar form for Mr Cishe but he doesn't know where that form is because it's not in the bundle here. So it seems that there was not only this application form from Mr Ntonga but also one for Mr Cishe which is not here.

MS PATEL: Okay so now that wasn't here, I'm sorry then that wasn't my understanding of the assistance that was rendered to this applicant in terms of the filling out of these application forms. My understanding was that the first two forms were filled in by the applicant himself and the third one by Mr ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Cishe and then the fourth one by Mr Ntonga, which fourth one we don't have here, is that correct?

MR LAX: Chair, this is the first we're hearing of the fourth one but be that as it may, we can no doubt canvass that issue later. Do I understand you correctly, Mr Ntonga, that either yourself or Mr Mbandazayo filled out a form which was typed on behalf of this applicant?

MR NTONGA: Yes Mr Chairman, that is before the last form which is in February 1997. Ours was in '96, same day, both of them same time that ...[indistinct] in prison and both

were submitted to the TRC. I don't know what happened to that form.

CHAIRPERSON: I'm sure we can accept what Mr Ntonga says and that there is another form for Mr Cishe but it's not here.

MS PATEL: Are you saying though that the applications forms that we have before us, that the amendments that were made thereto were made after you received legal advice or am I missing the point here?

MR CISHE: A lot of things that came with a legal representative, were not aware of whether to put them there or not. What we realised in these forms was this mistake that we made. Then a lawyer came and he told us what was required from us by the TRC.

MS PATEL: Okay, maybe there's been confusion. Are you saying then that the lawyer had advised you as to what the requirements were for an amnesty application and then the amendments and then a fuller application was then sent to us and that it wasn't as a result of written requests from our offices to yourself requesting further particulars to the application?

MR CISHE: The changes that we made was because we realised our mistake and we were also told what was required or what was not there that was supposed to be there.

MS PATEL: And you were told this by the legal representative and not the TRC.

MR CISHE: We were told by the legal representative as he came to us and as he told us that information was enough.

MS PATEL: So then your evidence earlier that the changes were made because the TRC offices had sent in a request for further particulars or said that your form as it was filled out wasn't sufficient is not correct?

MR CISHE: The TRC told us that the evidence or what we wrote down here was not enough?

CHAIRPERSON: Did you get that information through your lawyer, I think, or did you get it from a letter from the TRC? I think that's what's being asked.

MR CISHE: Our lawyer.

MS PATEL: Thank you, because I want to put it to you that during the period that these forms were filled out and sent to us, there were in fact no written requests for further particulars to your application forms and that the TRC offices itself had no part in the changes or the amendments that would have been occasioned to these forms and that applies to both yourself and your co-applicant.

MR CISHE: If you put it that way, I don't know how to put it because I was told this.

MS PATEL: Okay, thank you Honourable Chairperson, I have no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS PATEL

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Ms Patel. Mr Ntonga, do you have any re-examination?

MR NTONGA: None Mr Chairman.

NO RE-EXAMINATION BY MR NTONGA

CHAIRPERSON: Dr Tsotsi, do you have any questions to ask Mr Cishe?

DR TSOTSI: Mr Cishe, when you completed your training at Sterkspruit, you told us you were given arms and ammunition to carry back to Port Elizabeth with you, is that correct?

MR CISHE: That is correct.

DR TSOTSI: Now when these arms were given to you, were you told who the targets of your attacks would be, generally told, given a general instruction as to who to kill and who not to kill?

MR CISHE: When we were given arms we were told that we will work as that particular unit, the four of us, and we were told that our operation was to attack police and the soldiers that we come across.

DR TSOTSI: And who told you this, was it I think you said before it was Jabu? Was it Jabu who told you this or was there anybody else involved?

MR CISHE: It was Jabu Mdunge.

DR TSOTSI: So did he mention anything to you about the policy of the PAC in these matters?

MR CISHE: He told us.

DR TSOTSI: What did he tell you about the policy of the PAC?

MR CISHE: The situation that we were under in the past regime, we as Africans were fighting that government so that the Africans can get back their country. As APLA members we were not going to sit down and discuss or negotiate, we would attack because the government doesn't want to listen. PAC would go to the negotiations, we are not to negotiate.

DR TSOTSI: Well was it terms of these instructions that you attacked the police?

MR CISHE: As a soldier under an instruction I have to obey orders.

DR TSOTSI: And you were given those orders, you have told us generally, you were given general instructions. Was it necessary for you to obtain specific instructions in respect of every attack that you made or did you have to use your own judgement in the matter?

MR CISHE: Each and every soldier gets an instruction. A soldier doesn't do whatever he wants to do.

DR TSOTSI: A question asked, already asked, is that you've told us, the Committee, that you received instruction from your commander, Jabu, is that right?

MR CISHE: Yes.

DR TSOTSI: Was it in respect of all the operations that you took part in?

MR CISHE: Yes that is correct.

DR TSOTSI: Was it necessary for you to obtain instructions from a higher officer or could you act on instructions of Jabu without obtaining instructions from a higher officer than Jabu?

MR CISHE: I can put it this way, Jabu - we were under Jabu. He was our unit commander. We were supposed to get instructions from them, we were required to get instructions straight from him.

DR TSOTSI: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Advocate Bosman do you have any questions to ask Mr Cishe?

ADV. BOSMAN: Yes thank you Chairperson.

Mr Cishe, who told you that the four of you would form a unit?

MR CISHE: Jabu Mdunge.

ADV. BOSMAN: No but you said, I wrote it down here, that you said we were told that the four of us would form a unit.

MR CISHE: He introduced himself to us so he is the fourth one.

ADV. BOSMAN: Was this at Sterkspruit?

MR CISHE: Yes.

ADV. BOSMAN: And then who issued you with weapons?

MR CISHE: It was him.

ADV. BOSMAN: Where did this happen, the issuing of the weapons?

MR CISHE: In Sterkspruit.

ADV. BOSMAN: And then how did you transport the weapons to Port Elizabeth?

MR CISHE: We came by taxi.

ADV. BOSMAN: Thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Lax do you have any questions to ask Mr Cishe?

MR LAX: Thank you Chairperson.

Mr Cishe during your training were you made aware of any code of conduct that you should be following as an APLA soldier?

MR CISHE: The only thing that I was told that anything I've been given instructions to, I must do it.

MR LAX: Is that the only code of conduct you were told?

MR CISHE: Yes.

MR LAX: Have you never heard of the 15 points of attention which is the APLA code of conduct?

MR CISHE: Yes I heard about them as well.

MR LAX: You weren't trained in that at Sterkspruit though?

MR CISHE: I was trained for many things. I was also trained in the manner on how the soldier had to behave amongst people anyway.

MR LAX: Well, when I asked you whether you were trained in the APLA code of conduct or you knew anything about the APLA code of conduct, you said no, all you knew was to obey orders. Now that I draw your attention to the 15 points of attention, now you say you know about it. Any APLA soldier knows about the 15 points of attention. It's the fundamental training and the first thing you learn. Now is it correct that you completed your co-applicants one form for him in your handwriting?

MR CISHE: Yes that's true.

MR LAX: You see he told us yesterday that was his handwriting?

MR CISHE: He was not asked directly whether he wrote that himself. That's why he said he wrote that because both of us were helping each other because we were both arrested for the very same case.

MR LAX: He was asked whether that was his handwriting and he said yes it was his handwriting, he didn't say he had been helped by you. He said he'd been helped by a lawyer in one of the other forms. Why didn't you draw his attention to the fact that he was making a mistake?

MR CISHE: There was one that was written by his representative.

MR LAX: But the one that was being referred to was the one that was supposedly in his handwriting. Why didn't you stop him and say hang on, you're making a mistake, I wrote that thing?

MR CISHE: I couldn't do that because I didn't know that you are allowed to stop someone whilst he is still speaking.

MR LAX: Well, why didn't you draw your lawyer's attention to that afterwards so it could be made known to us.

MR CISHE: I was very far from him.

MR LAX: Now what was your Chimeranga name?

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry what was that word?

MR LAX: Chimeranga, it's a term that comes from Shona, means a ...[indistinct], a battle name.

MR CISHE: I don't know whether that's a question or what, I can't understand.

MR LAX: I'm asking you what was your Chimeranga name, every APLA soldier had at least one Chimeranga name. What was your Chimeranga name?

MR CISHE: My name is the one that I'm using here even on the Chimeranga basis, because no one else knows this name except myself and those who were in my unit and the nickname that I'm known of as Teenage, is the one that I grew up with.

MR LAX: So you were known by a nickname Teenage but that wasn't your Chimeranga name? Your Chimeranga name was Kwanele Msizi, is that what you're saying?

CHAIRPERSON: No, Phakamile Cishe.

MR LAX: I beg your pardon, sorry. Phakamile Cishe, is that not your real name?

MR CISHE: Yes it's my real name.

MR LAX: So that's your birth name is it and your family name?

MR CISHE: Yes.

MR LAX: No APLA soldier would us his birth name or family name as a Chimeranga name? The purpose of a Chimeranga name is a code name so that you cannot be discovered if you use it and no one would know what your real name was, so your comrades couldn't give you away if they were captured, that's the whole purpose of it.

MR CISHE: I will tell you this way. For me to be known by other soldiers, meaning APLA soldiers, was not a need. You can't just know anybody’s name anyhow. Secondly I was not afraid of what I was doing and I couldn't run away from my name.

MR LAX: Well you see, it's the first time in the many hearings I've attended that I've come across an APLA soldier who used his real name in his operations. It's just very surprising to me.

MR CISHE: Maybe you haven't met others.

MR LAX: Well it may surprise you that I have actually sat and listened to many, many applications for amnesty. Mr Ntonga can tell you about it but that's another issue.

MR CISHE: I'm not disagreeing with you but I'm just saying maybe you haven't met those who don't use their code names.

MR LAX: The car that you were arrested for was the one that you were involved in an accident, is that right?

MR CISHE: Yes.

MR LAX: Now which car was that exactly, just so that I can clarify it in my own mind?

MR CISHE: It was a Cortina Big Six.

MR LAX: And why had you stolen that car?

MR CISHE: We were about to have an operation.

MR LAX: Carry on.

MR CISHE: That's it.

MR LAX: So how did you become to be involved in an accident with it?

MR CISHE: I was from stealing this car and I was on my way to find a place for it in one of the ...[indistinct] here in kwaZakhele. Unfortunately, I was sent by a person, Monza, with two dogs, yellow in colour and two Boers and then they chased me but I have already left or I was far away from it. As I was about the approach the stop street there was a car that was coming closer to me. Even this one that was still chasing me was still holding on. So I noticed that I was driving I had to flicker the lights so that this coming car could notice that I was in a hurry and it can pass by quickly. This car slowed down so I had to go straight to it. Those were not intentions to hit that car. So that was how I got arrested, I couldn't escape.

MR LAX: Who else was with you in that instant, was that Mongesi who was with you, or somebody else?

MR CISHE: It was Mongesi.

MR LAX: What happened to Mongesi in that incident, was he also arrested?

MR CISHE: No he was not arrested. He had a chance to get out of the window and run.

MR LAX: And so those were the only three cars that you say you were involved in. The first one, this one and the last one which you knew about but you weren't actually involved in the stealing of, is that right, just those three?

MR CISHE: The three of them, yes.

MR LAX: And your unit didn't carry out any other operations besides those three?

MR CISHE: Which three?

MR LAX: Well, the first theft and the second and the operation that followed that, the second theft and then the aborted operation as a result of your accident and then the third theft and the operation that followed that. Those are the only three, is that right?

MR CISHE: Yes, that's the only three.

MR LAX: Yesterday we heard about a Toyota vehicle.

MR CISHE: Yes.

MR LAX: Now where does that one come in?

MR CISHE: It is the third one. It's a Toyota and two Cortinas, two Ford Cortinas, makes three.

MR LAX: Now that one was - let me just get the dates right here - that was towards the end of November, was that on the 29th November?

MR CISHE: When exactly what happened?

MR LAX: When the Toyota was stolen.

MR CISHE: I cannot clearly remember the exact date but I do remember the car, it was stolen.

MR LAX: You see, did that form part of what would have been - so that was on the 24th December, I beg your pardon, it was just before the last incident, is that right?

MR CISHE: What happened on the 24th December?

MR LAX: That's when the car that was used on the 26th December was stolen and the 26th December was the date that you had your last operation?

MR CISHE: The dates of stealing the car I cannot clearly remember, it's been a long time. I cannot remember the exact dates. It's very difficult just to remember the date in anything.

MR LAX: Right. With there anything unusual about that particular car that you might recall? Didn't it have a special spoiler on it or something like that?

MR CISHE: Are you talking about this car of the second operation?

MR LAX: Of the third operation, you said the third vehicle was the Toyota, that's what we're talking about.

MR CISHE: The Toyota is the first car, is the car that we used to shoot on the first incident of first operation and then the second one was this Ford Cortina, is the one that I was arrested for during November and then the third one is this one for the last operation.

MR LAX: And what was that?

MR CISHE: It was a Ford Cortina Big Six.

MR LAX: Okay, there must have been some mistake in the translation because what was translated to me was that the third vehicle was the Toyota, but be that as it may, you now say the first vehicle was the Toyota and that was the one that was stolen on the 15th November and used on the 18th November is that correct and you were involved in that one?

MR CISHE: Toyota.

MR LAX: Correct. You see, the first vehicle that you stole was a Ford Cortina, it wasn't a Toyota and that's apparent from the judgement, if you look at page 54, it formed the basis of charge one. So if you look at page 54 of these papers which is page 10 of the judgement, the last two lines, it talks about the vehicle that formed the basis of charge one and it was a Ford Cortina with the registration number CB7397, it was a maroon red vehicle and it had a sunroof which had a special two division, a double division. It wasn't a Toyota, are you maybe making a mistake.

MR CISHE: It's not me making a mistake because I do know, I was the one who was using it. This shows that as I've said before about these policemen of the past regime and the judge as well, all of them who were handling the case, makes it clear on how were they pursuing their job against us.

MR LAX: So you didn't steal that car, this maroon red Cortina?

MR CISHE: We didn't steal a Ford Cortina for the first operation.

MR LAX: Did you steal a maroon red Cortina that had a sunroof which was divided into two?

MR CISHE: No, there's no such a thing.

MR LAX: Okay. Then if we look at charge number five which was the vehicle that was stolen on the 23rd November, that was a light green Cortina stolen at Green Acres on the 23rd November 1990. Did you steal that vehicle?

MR CISHE: No.

MR LAX: So that's something else that the police fabricated against you, that one?

MR CISHE: Yes.

MR LAX: Okay. If we look at the vehicle in charge number 6, that was stolen on the 24th November, it was a silver coloured Cortina with a black vinyl roof, it was also stolen at Green Acres. Did you steal that one?

MR CISHE: No.

MR LAX: You don't know anything about that one?

MR CISHE: No.

MR LAX: And then if we look at number 7, charge number 7, it's the 29th April, that is a red Cortina which was stolen in Belmont Terrace. Do you know about that one?

MR CISHE: Are you referring to a red Cortina?

MR LAX: A red Cortina, stolen in Belmont Terrace.

MR CISHE: I don't know the streets in town but there is a red Cortina involved in which I was arrested for.

MR LAX: And is there one that you did actually steal, that's what I'm trying to understand.

MR CISHE: I don't know whether it is the one but it was a Big Six.

MR LAX: Okay. Then on the 24th December there was a vehicle that formed count 8 of your charges. This is the vehicle that belonged to somebody from Bloemfontein. You will remember that from your trial. It's not clear to me what make of vehicle it was, but do you remember that one?

MR CISHE: I don't want to say I do remember or I don't remember about that car because if it was stated here what kind of a car is it, maybe I would remember it.

MR LAX: Well do you remember at your trial there were fingerprints found in the one car, your fingerprints were found in the one car, do you remember that?

MR CISHE: Yes I do remember that.

MR LAX: That's the car we're talking about.

MR CISHE: Yes I do remember that car if it is the one you are referring to.

MR LAX: Alright and then the last car that I'm interested in is the one that formed count 13 which was the one of the 28th December and that was a beige XR6 Cortina at Grand Bazaars, Uitenhage, that one you've already said in your evidence you weren't involved in that at all, is that right?

MR CISHE: Yes that is correct.

MR LAX: Thank you, that's very helpful to us because it tells us that of the six counts you were convicted of, you only admit two of them?

MR CISHE: There are two cars that I stole and there is a third one that Msizi and Jabu came with.

MR LAX: Well what car was that?

MR CISHE: I came with two cars together with Mongesi.

MR LAX: So what was the third car that they came with?

MR CISHE: An orange Toyota.

MR LAX: You see in the six charges that you were convicted for, for motor theft, that is what I'm trying to help you understand, of those six, there isn't a Toyota mentioned here and of the six you say you know about, only one is possibly a Toyota and the other one is a Cortina. Do you understand?

MR CISHE: There was a Toyota. It is the one that was burnt near the power station, the one used in the first operation. All what is written here was written by the police at Louis le Grange.

MR LAX: You see, you were not convicted for a Toyota, that's what I'm trying to tell you. You were not convicted for the first vehicle as being a Toyota. The vehicle you were convicted for was a Cortina, as I've explained. I'm just wanting you to understand that. Thank you Chairperson I've no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Just one point Mr Cishe, for you to tell me if I heard correctly or incorrectly but did you say that Jabu, your commander, had instructed you and your co-applicant that in the event of you being arrested that you should tell the police where to find the rest of your unit?

MR CISHE: Yes that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Ntonga, do you have any questions arising from questions that have been put by the panel?

MR NTONGA: None, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Griebenow, do you have any questions arising?

MR GRIEBENOW: I have no questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr van der Merwe?

MR VAN DER MERWE: Unfortunately, Mr Chairman, I've just been supplied with this and there's just two questions that I would just like to put to the witness which we weren't put in possession of.

CHAIRPERSON: Is this, this document that was handed out to you when Ms Patel was questioning?

MR VAN DER MERWE: That is correct, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes alright, I'll allow you to do it seeing that you didn't get that document earlier and also of course I'll give Mr Ntonga the right to re-examine on any questions that you may put on this aspect.

FURTHER CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR VAN DER MERWE: We thank the Committee for the indulgence, Mr Chairman.

Mr Cishe, I see that in your statement that was supplied to the Truth Commission, you say that you had a criminal record of car theft before you joined APLA, is that correct?

MR CISHE: That is correct.

MR VAN DER MERWE: How many convictions for car theft did you have at that stage?

MR CISHE: I was convicted once, I received lectures.

MR VAN DER MERWE: You were still a minor at that stage, am I correct?

MR CISHE: Are you asking me.

MR VAN DER MERWE: You can just confirm, I said you were a minor at that stage, is that correct?

MR CISHE: Yes that is correct.

MR VAN DER MERWE: I see your statement also says that you read the statement of your co-applicant, Kwanele Msizi, and that you confirm his statement, is that correct?

MR CISHE: That is correct.

MR VAN DER MERWE: And I refer you to Kwanele Msizi's statement, paragraph 4.6 of it and I will read it to you. This refers to your first mission as we have come to know it, where the two policemen and the other person was killed.

"The vehicle"

- this was after attack on the police and they were murdered.

"The vehicle was thereafter ditched at a place where it could be recovered."

It does not say it was burnt, do you confirm that?

MR CISHE: I can see what is written here, it is true, we left it in a place where it could be found but it was burnt so that they could not find fingerprints.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Did this burning only occur once? CHAIRPERSON: Do you mean on the same vehicle?

MR VAN DER MERWE: Well on any vehicle. Did you only burn one vehicle, you never burnt any more vehicles, just this one vehicle?

MR CISHE: Yes, it was only one vehicle.

MR VAN DER MERWE: You see because in paragraph 6.1 of Mr Msizi's statement, he says

"Our modus operandi was to steal a vehicle before the operation and thereafter ditch it where it could be found."

Is that correct?

MR CISHE: That is correct.

MR VAN DER MERWE: And if it was burnt it wouldn't be found in any way that would be beneficial to anyone, is that correct? Nobody would know what it was used for?

MR CISHE: The reason why we burnt that car was because of the fingerprints. Whether it was used for what or not, there were cartridges of bullets inside.

MR VAN DER MERWE: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VAN DER MERWE

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr van der Merwe. Before I get to Mr Ntonga, do you have any questions arising out of questions?

MS PATEL: No thank you Honourable Chairperson.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS PATEL

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Ntonga, do you have any re-examination on the questions that have been put to your client now by Mr van der Merwe?

MR NTONGA: None, Mr Chairman, thank you.

NO RE-EXAMINATION BY MR NTONGA

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you Mr Cishe. That concludes your evidence, you may stand down.

WITNESS EXCUSED

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Ntonga, do you have any further witnesses?

MR NTONGA: No, that's the application for the applicants.

CHAIRPERSON: That's the case for both the applicants. Mr Griebenow?

MR GRIEBENOW: Thank you Chairperson, I have no witnesses.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr van der Merwe?

MR VAN DER MERWE: Thank you Mr Chairman, I have no witnesses to call.

CHAIRPERSON: We've now reached the stage of this hearing where there's no further evidence to be received and all that is required before a decision is arrived is the hearing of argument. I wonder if we shouldn't see the legal representatives in our office, to see what we can do about argument, when it will occur, because I see it's now twenty to four. If we could see you briefly and then just before we adjourn also I'll mention that there's the question of the victims as well that we must get particulars of. We're just going to take a short adjournment now because I'd like to discuss the question of when we're going to hear argument with the legal representatives, when they'll be in a position to present their argument and then we'll then reconvene after that and adjourn the matter if we don't hear argument today, we will adjourn the matter to a specific date for further arguments and we'll take a short adjournment at this stage, thank you.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you. We've now discussed the question of submissions to be made to the panel with the legal representatives involved. They all say that they cannot do it today, taking into account the time of day that it is and they need some time to prepare and it's been agreed that the argument will be delivered on Friday, this coming Friday at 9 o'clock in the morning at this hall. Yes that will be Friday the 16th October at 9 o'clock in the morning and at that time we will just hear argument as we have finished with the evidence and I've asked the Department of Correctional Services please to ensure that the applicants are also brought here in good time, preferably by quarter past eight or half past eight in the morning so we can start at that time because we will probably be having another application to hear that day as well. Thank you very much for attending and this matter is then postponed to the 16th October 1998 at 9 a.m.

Thank you.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS