MS COLERIDGE: Chairperson, we're starting with the Shabangu matter.
CHAIRPERSON: The Committee remains the same. Could the legal representatives of the applicants put themselves on record?
MS QUNTA: As it pleases, Mr Chairman. My name is Christine Qunta from the firm Qunta and Ntsebeza and I represent the applicant.
CHAIRPERSON: And of the victims?
MR KOOPEDI: Chairperson, Honourable Committee Members, my name is Brian Koopedi. I appear here for an interested party being the ANC.
MS COLERIDGE: My name is Lyn Coleridge and I appear on behalf of the victim, Mr Mayeza Mahule, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Right are we ready to proceed?
JUDGE DE JAGER: Is nobody appearing for the victims?
MS COLERIDGE: I am. Chairperson, if I can just address you in relation to implicated persons and to the notification. Mr Anthony Tsosobe has been notified in this instance, Mr David Moyese, they are co-accused in the applicant's High Court trial, Chairperson and then Mr David Mompane was also notified as he was arrested at the time or found with the applicant and he's mentioned in the Court Judgement as well in relation to arms and ammunition and so forth, Chairperson. And then Faith Mnisi was also served with a Section 19(iv) notice, Chairperson. Thank you.
JUDGE DE JAGER: Was there an reaction from Mr Tsosobe and Moyese?
MS COLERIDGE: No Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: As a matter of interest, can you tell us where they are?
MS COLERIDGE: I can't, I don't know if the applicant can help us but he says that, I've just liaised with him early this morning, I think they are aware of this as well Chairperson but we've had no response from them.
CHAIRPERSON: Are they still in custody?
MS COLERIDGE: Chairperson, I can't give you a clear indication thereof.
JUDGE DE JAGER: We've given notice to them at what address?
MS COLERIDGE: We've given notification to our investigative unit. Mr Johannes Moeme is here, I can just clarify and he was served with these notices to serve them on them, Chairperson. Chairperson, if you can just indulge me for 5 minutes just to - a few minutes, just to speak to Mr Moeme.
MS QUNTA: I'm informed by my client that they are aware of these proceedings but apparently they are not quite sure of the implications or what it means, but that's what I'm instructed.
JUDGE DE JAGER: Are they still in jail, or are they ...?
MS QUNTA: Perhaps I can hand over to my client.
MR SHABANGU: No, they are not in jail. The point of the matter is that at the end of the day they were never part and parcel of anything that relates to the matter under question now and the difficulty that was posed to them, is as to whether they should come and in the event that they do come, they would spend probably the whole day doing absolutely nothing because they don't know anything that relates to this matter. It was the matter actually that brings us together, is that we were charged with this ...(indistinct) so-called common purpose and they are not directly implicated in this matter in so far as that is concerned.
JUDGE DE JAGER: Do you know whether they applied for amnesty as far as the other matters are concerned, the treason aspect of the conviction?
MR SHABANGU: As far as I'm concerned, yes, they did apply for an amnesty for treason, the other matter that concerns them directly.
CHAIRPERSON: Has such an application been dealt with?
MS COLERIDGE: Chairperson I think - I'll just have to check whether there's a part-heard, no it's not in this matter. Chairperson, I can't give you a conclusive answer as to whether their matters have been heard. The only matter that's been placed on the roll for us, Chairperson, is this applicant and I'm sure that our analysts, in this instance, because also they're not related to this specific incident Chairperson, in the Mahule matter, we can say that - I'm not sure whether they've had a hearing in their instances, Chairperson, but I'm sure we could just check with our offices and get a direction Chairperson and I can inform you thereof.
Chairperson and just in so far as the applicant is concerned, he states that they were not involved in these matters with him, Chairperson, so we can also see it as separate, although they were all charged with a common purpose instance and they just lumped the accused in this matter together, so therefore we can regard it as separate, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: I'm sure the Court didn't find common purpose, did it? At page 805 of the Judgment it appears to say that the State thought to allege common purpose but the Court didn't consider it necessary to go into that aspect as each act committed, or shown to have been committed by each of the accused falls under the description of high treason.
MS COLERIDGE: Thank you Chairperson, that is correct. Can we proceed Chairperson?
CHAIRPERSON: Certainly.
MS COLERIDGE: Thank you.
MS QUNTA: I'm not sure, I thought that the applicant would be sworn in.
CHAIRPERSON: Are you calling the applicant as a witness?
MS QUNTA: As a witness, that's correct, Mr Chairman.
JUDGE DE JAGER: What language would he using?
MS QUNTA: He's going to speak in English.
J M SHABANGU: (sworn states)
EXAMINATION BY MS QUNTA: Mr Shabangu can you explain to the Committee what you do at present?
MR SHABANGU: At the present moment I'm employed as an Executive Director of the company called ...(indistinct) Africa Limited.
MS QUNTA: And could you give the Committee a background of your growing up, where you went to school?
MR SHABANGU: I was born and brought up in Middleburg in the province of Mpumalanga, in 1959. I attended my school there until I passed Standard 8, at which period then I left the country to join the African National Congress and ultimately Umkhonto weSizwe.
I left early 1978 and I landed in Swaziland. From there onwards I proceeded to Mozambique, Angola. That's where I got my military training, until 1979. Late 1979 in December, to be specific, I started to come back inside the country and that's the background as to when I joined the African National Congress.
MS QUNTA: Could you just explain what prompted you to leave the country, leave school and leave the country?
MR SHABANGU: Well at the time I left the country there was a social upheaval in the country and I happened to be active at school, the SRC and by being active at that particular level, I then got exposed to the political situation which was quite unbearable, in particular to the black people of this country and which social conditions forced me to leave the country and to go and seek better means to bring about an end to the obnoxious system of apartheid.
MS QUNTA: Can you explain to the Committee when you joined the ANC, where you were stationed and the activities that you engaged in whilst stationed outside?
MR SHABANGU: I joined the ANC in Swaziland, that was in 1978, the period it was July. I was given an option of going to school because at that particular stage I was still very young. Because of the unbearable social conditions back home, I was quite militant, so much so that I could not accept an option of going to school. I therefore opted to go for military training, in spite of persuasions not to do so. Because I was very young, I should go to school and so forth, but I felt that I want to join those that will bring an end to the unjust system of apartheid and therefore I opted to go for military training. I went to Angola where I trained quite extensively.
JUDGE DE JAGER: Where in Angola did you train?
MR SHABANGU: The first camp that I went to, it was Ibashe and the second one I went to Funde and the last one, I went to next to Malange, there was a military training camp there that we opened.
JUDGE DE JAGER: Is that in the East or South or North of Angola?
MR SHABANGU: It was in the East.
JUDGE DE JAGER: Thank you.
MS QUNTA: And after your training, what happened then, after you completed your training?
MR SHABANGU: Well, after I completed my training I was one of those that selected to go to the front line and at that particular stage, I should think that I regard myself that I've grown up quite well to distinguish what was wrong and what was right and I was finally stationed in Mozambique and subsequently Swaziland. I was commuting between Swaziland, Mozambique or Maputo and Mbabane and finally South Africa.
MS QUNTA: Whilst you were stationed in Mozambique, can you explain what activities you engaged in and just give us a background of your time there?
MR SHABANGU: Whilst I was stationed in Mozambique, we were then divided into small units for security reasons and initially I operated alone and secondly I was put in a unit of two and I was the lead in that unit, which can be called a Section Commander and I did reconnaissance whilst I was based in Mozambique. I had to come inside the country to identified targets that were in keeping with our broad objectives of bringing to an end the apartheid system.
MS QUNTA: And what were these targets? Can you explain?
MR SHABANGU: The machinery that I was involved in, it was basically to deal with the targets, that was the police, in particular the police that were in the apartheid machinery. The purpose was to immobilise them not to continue to participate in the system that does not serve the best interests of them, but it serves only the interests of the minority whites in the country.
MS QUNTA: Now ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Was this black police that you were aiming at?
MR SHABANGU: I beg your pardon.
CHAIRPERSON: You say it was so they wouldn't serve the aims of the white, were you aiming at the black police?
MR SHABANGU: The particular aim, it was to demoralise black policemen who were serving in the apartheid machinery, that's correct.
MS QUNTA: Now when did you - at the time you were talking now, you were the Section Commander, when did you actually come back into the country? Did you stay, or did you come and go and give us time periods.
MR SHABANGU: ; Well, I came inside the country on quite a number of occasions, in and out of the country and so forth and so on, looking into specific areas that we'd set down and identify those at the possible areas that we should involve and the first time I came inside the country, it was on the 26th of December, 1979 and I spent a period of a week inside the country, identifying areas where one would stay comfortably and also having some ...(indistinct) base so that I should be in a better position to retreat quite safely.
JUDGE DE JAGER: Would I be correct in assuming that your aim was in fact to overthrow the then Government and replace it by the democratic elected Government?
MR SHABANGU: That's absolutely correct.
JUDGE DE JAGER: And could you now come to the present instance? Why did you target Mr Mahule?
MR SHABANGU: Well, coming to the specific incident, he was identified as one of those policemen at the time participating within the broader structures of the apartheid police machinery and which machinery was meant, in most instances, to attack any uprising that was directed against the then Government and people who were used who would be put in the forefront of such suppressions were our own fellow black policemen and hence therefore the purpose essentially was to say to them: "We are warning you, don't be part and parcel of a system that has no moral standing in the international community or any international body for that matter."
MS QUNTA: Was there a particular reason why you chose Sgt Mahule?
MR SHABANGU: Well at the time of his attack, there was a school boycott in an area called Bosfontein where Sgt Mahule was stationed in that particular area and to deter some of these black police from participating in those actions of suppressing the angry protests of the students against the system of apartheid, it was therefore felt it was important to send a particular message to them that they should not participate, they should not be part and parcel of suppressing such students in their just protests.
MS QUNTA: Now can you explain to the Committee exactly how you planned the act and the details of the act and what weapon you used?
MR SHABANGU: Well, the first thing that happened is, I ...(indistinct) identifying policemen who were residing around that particular area and also getting the views of ordinary people, the view of the students, of policemen, that actually serve as a threat against, and having done so, he was singularly pointed out as a person that should be given a warning not to continue to be part and parcel of the police that were being used to suppress the students or any social unrest that could be taking place, be it of whatever nature, be it a rank boycott or whatever and the planning then went as follows
Having got those ...(indistinct) I then submitted the information in to our Commanders in Maputo and we looked whether it forms part and parcel of the broader strategy of bringing to an end the apartheid system and we felt that it was indeed essential that we demobilised quite effectively our own fellow black policemen from continuing to participate in actions where their own children are involved in. Having agreed on that, then it was agreed that an act of deterrent should then be carried out against Mr Mahule and I must point out here ...(intervention)
JUDGE DE JAGER: You said you agreed, you reported back and you agreed on that. With whom did you agree?
MR SHABANGU: We agreed with our Commanders back at ...(intervention)
JUDGE DE JAGER: Who were the Commanders?
MR SHABANGU: Unfortunately some of them died in the ...(indistinct) actions of the apartheid system when they were attacking Mozambique, but the living one at the time, who continues to be inside the country, it was Vosloo and I must point out that we, having agreed, we then felt that the suitable deterrent weapon that we can use against such policemen, it should be either we use pamphlets against them and if it is not possible to use pamphlets, we can then use offensive hand grenades and for the specific instant an offensive hand grenade, RGD5 was used, not an F1 deliberate. An F1 is a defensive one which definitely, if we had used a defensive one, it could have meant that the aim was to kill and the aim was not to kill, that is why we used an offensive one. An offensive is meant - in combat operations you use it when you are to attack. You throw a hand grenade and then during the confusion you come with an assault weapon and so forth and I personally then used the offensive hand grenade and it was thrown in his bedroom specifically. It was in terms of my own reconnaissances that at least around half-past ten, eleven or twelve, he's already at home and the explosion will then indicate that certainly this is a clear warning because if it was intended to kill, I would have simply done so.
MS QUNTA: After you threw the hand grenade you then left the premises?
MR SHABANGU: Well, after the hand grenade was thrown, because there was already by that time - I waited outside, I waited some distance away until the bedroom light was switched off. I stayed for an hour after that and I was sure that even if there could be anything around, I will be able to carry out my operation quite successfully and I threw in the hand grenade and I disappeared in the dark of the night.
JUDGE DE JAGER: At the trial it was stated that the hand grenade struck the window bar. Was that so, or was it thrown into the house?
MR SHABANGU: Well, the hand grenade was thrown into the window, so there were window frames there. It's possible that it could have hit the window frames but the aim, as I've indicated earlier on, it was not to kill.
MS QUNTA: Now you've also applied ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Surely if you throw a hand grenade through a window into a bedroom where you think a man is asleep in his bed, there is every likelihood it would kill?
MR SHABANGU: Not as far as I know the offensive hand grenades, but certainly if it was a defensive F1 hand grenade it would have killed, it can kill a person, not an offensive one.
MS QUNTA: At what distance - an offensive hand grenade, at what distance would it cause harm to a person, an individual?
MR SHABANGU: Well it can cause harm if the room is as small as a toilet, but certainly if a room is quite big enough, it will explode and there will be gasses and during that pandemonium, because that is why it is called an offensive one, you'd throw it and during the pandemonium then you move forward with an assault rifle and so forth and so on and that one, it was simply meant, no weapons were used, only the hand grenade, that is the offensive, was used, so in that regard it's not possible.
CHAIRPERSON: Doesn't it also cause shrapnel?
MR SHABANGU: ; Shrapnel of an offensive, it's not possible that it could kill a person or impale or so forth.
CHAIRPERSON: There was evidence led, was there not, at the trial that there was shrapnel found in the external wall?
MR SHABANGU: Well certainly, you see if it explodes and there is sand or stones and so forth, where it explodes there would be those shrapnel that you could get, probably if there could be some many matters around, then it can cause that, in as much as probably you can think of the glasses that will be flying in the event it explodes and so forth, but certainly that won't kill a person, not an offensive. I haven't heard of any incidents so far in any military combat work, where a person died as a result of an offensive grenade otherwise they would have changed them and made them less effective, because the purpose of an offensive is that you use it and then during the confusion, then you attack.
JUDGE DE JAGER: Did it cause fire?
MR SHABANGU: It doesn't cause fire unless there is petrol around.
JUDGE DE JAGER: Was this house - did it burn afterwards or while you were watching, or what was the result?
MR SHABANGU: Well the purpose was not actually to watch about the repercussions. The repercussions, in so far as an identification of a target was concerned, it was to ...(indistinct) a person from continuing to participate in activities that were not popular and therefore as soon as a hand grenade is thrown, you run away.
JUDGE DE JAGER: You disappear.
MR SHABANGU: You escape, ja.
MS QUNTA: Now you also applied for amnesty in respect of the charges of possession of weapons in the trial for high treason. Can you explain to the Committee about that? Can you give some details?
MR SHABANGU: Well I applied precisely because I was found in possession of a Makarov pistol and in terms of the new democratic Government, no one is allowed to be in possession of illegal weapons and in the event that those weapons were used in the past for activities which could be described today as having caused injuries or death, I applied for that, but certainly the weapons were not used, I'm merely following also the Act, what is it that you are supposed to apply for.
MS QUNTA: ; But you're applying for amnesty in respect of the charges raised in that trial of the high treason that you were convicted of, is that correct?
MR SHABANGU: Yes, I'm also applying for the charges that I was found guilty and sentenced for and served a sentence therein.
JUDGE DE JAGER: It's not clear but from page 49 it seems as though you've only been found guilty of high treason.
MR SHABANGU: Well high treason ...(intervention)
JUDGE DE JAGER: Well yes, but there was a separate sentence, for instance illegal possession of a firearm, apart from the high treason sentence.
MR SHABANGU: Well as far as I could remember, I was found guilty for - under terrorism, high treason, all those things and high treason encompasses everything.
JUDGE DE JAGER: Yes.
MR SHABANGU: Including the weapons, including the common purpose, including the attack, including belonging to an unlawful organisation and so forth and so on, with the intention of bringing an end to the then present State and so on and that constitutes high treason. That's how it was defined by our attorney and that's how also, when we were found guilty the then Justice Theron explained as to why he felt that we should be found guilty, rather why he found us guilty of high treason.
Well, the other thing that I've indicated is that I'm applying for amnesty with a view to expunging my name from the South African criminal records and to supply any aggrieved or harmed individuals with an explanation as to my actions with a view to reconciling our differences.
JUDGE DE JAGER: It would be correct and it would cover everything, Ms Qunta, if we would consider amnesty for high treason and any act directly connected with the explosion caused at the house of Mr Mahule?
MS QUNTA: That is correct, Judge, and those are my instructions.
JUDGE DE JAGER: Ja, but then still it may not cover the weapons, so there must be separate mentioning of illegal possession of the weapons because he had the weapons at the stage when he actually threw the hand grenade.
MS QUNTA: That is correct, Judge, I have asked and I will ask him again now to explain the possession of the weapons.
CHAIRPERSON: With respect to what my colleague has said, shouldn't we rather say, if we grant amnesty that it should be in respect of the attack made on the house of Mr Mahule on the precise date and the unlawful possession of firearms and ammunition which gave rise to his conviction on a charge of high treason?
MS QUNTA: That is correct.
CHAIRPERSON: Because it appears that he has totally distinguishing himself from the other acts which the Judge dealt with which, also in respect of the other persons charged, gave rise to their conviction. He is just this one incident and the possession of firearms and ammunition.
MR QUNTA: I think the applicant's concern is and he said this, that he did not participate in those acts that he was found guilty of because he had nothing to do with those acts.
CHAIRPERSON: Well he wasn't found guilty of them. If you look at the Judgment, the Judge mentions the fact that the State argued that there was common purpose but said the Court was not going into that because there was at least one event involving each of the accused, which gave rise to a conviction of high treason.
MS QUNTA: Thank you for drawing my attention to that and I will ask the applicant to deal with the possession of weapons, unlawful possession of weapons because those in fact added two incidents that he was ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Was he charged with that at the same time at the one trial, or was there a separate trial?
MS QUNTA: Perhaps I can ask him to explain because that's my understanding, Judge.
MR SHABANGU: It was only one trial and charged all those acts and activities outlined in the Judgement, under one trial, not separately. There was no any other trial that took place other than the one that took place here in Pretoria.
MS QUNTA: I see the Judge is quoting the indictment on pages 23 and 24 onwards, but whether the weapon was included in the indictment it wouldn't matter, he's admitting that he had an illegal and he's asking for amnesty in that regard, so whether it's included in the indictment or not, wouldn't ...
MS QUNTA: That is correct.
CHAIRPERSON: Further questions?
MS QUNTA: I have no further questions Chairperson.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS QUNTA
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS COLERIDGE: Thank you, Chairperson. It is my instructions, Chairperson, that the victim, Mr Mayeza Mahule does not oppose the applicant's application for amnesty and there are however just a few questions that we'd like to put to the applicant.
In relation to your training, who gave you the specific training? Who was the person that trained you initially? You were in Angola, Mozambique, can you just give us some names in relation to that?
MR SHABANGU: The name is Umkhonto weSizwe.
MS COLERIDGE: But the instructor who trained you, did you have an instructor?
MR SHABANGU: Certainly I did.
MS COLERIDGE: Can you give us the name of your instructors?
MR SHABANGU: One instructor is Mike and all those are pseudonyms, the other is Rashid and that's a pseudonym, the other one is Stewart and that's a pseudonym and the list can go on endlessly.
MS COLERIDGE: And do you have their real names, not their code names?
MR SHABANGU: I don't.
MS COLERIDGE: For this incident, you threw a hand grenade. How did you come in possession of that hand grenade? Who supplied you with that weapon?
MR SHABANGU: It was supplied by the then immediate Commander whose MK name is Victor.
MS COLERIDGE: And what is his real name?
MR SHABANGU: I don't know and he subsequently died in exile.
MS COLERIDGE: How long before the incident did he supply you with these weapons?
MR SHABANGU: Well the weapons were intended to a specific target, it was only then and that was it.
MS COLERIDGE: Was it intended for Mr Mahule's house, I mean as a target?
MR SHABANGU: It was intended for that particular operation, that's correct.
MS COLERIDGE: Then just in relation to, Mr Mahule gave some evidence to our Human Rights Violations Committee. I just want to ask a question in relation to that evidence that he presented there. He stated that there was a Mr Masheko who was also station, who was also a police officer at the time and who was also responsible for acts against the person for arresting young boys and so forth in the community. At any instance was Mr Masheko or was Mr Mahule mistakenly identified as Mr Masheko?
MR SHABANGU: No, my ability to identify the target at a particular point in time, was 100% accurate and the information supplied as all civilians in the documentation, it remains as accurate as it was then.
MS COLERIDGE: Did you personally target Mr Mahule? Was it - were you solely responsible for say for instance the target list? Were you responsible for it?
MR SHABANGU: I was personally responsible and no any other person.
MS COLERIDGE: And then he also mentions Mr Natiwan who shot...(intervention)
MR SHABANGU: Mr who?
MS COLERIDGE: Mr Natiwan. I'll get the name Chairperson, it's page 10 of the Bundle. You can see in the middle of the page, line 20.
MR SHABANGU: Yes, I see that.
MS COLERIDGE: You see the spelling there, Natiwan, that he was responsible for shooting a boy in that area and that people actually thought that it was Mr Mahule that was responsible for it, also once again a mistaken identity, do you know anything of that, or ...?
MR SHABANGU: If the name was correctly spelled out, I would be knowing the person, but the manner in which it is spelled, I have difficulty in identifying as to who the person might be.
MS COLERIDGE: But it wasn't your information that he was responsible for the shooting of Paulus Mabusa?
MR SHABANGU: My information remained consistent, that of Mr Mahule.
CHAIRPERSON: It appears that was a completely separate incident and they burned his shop on that incident. It had nothing to do with this.
MS COLERIDGE: ; Yes, Chairperson, I'm just asking whether he knows about it, Chairperson and also that people thought it was the victim that was responsible for that matter Chairperson. And then I just want to refer you to ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: You see also I think if we're going to refer to that, you should look at page 13, middle of the page where Mr Mashala says
"As I have said, I said this during my deliberation with Captain Natiwan. He is actually the person who shot the son of Mr Paulus Mabusa, but because people hated me, they turned round and said, they said it is myself who shot that one."
So he would appear to indicate there that he was disliked by the community.
MS COLERIDGE: That's right, Chairperson.
MR SHABANGU: And probably that also would indicate the accuracy of my information.
MS COLERIDGE: And then I just also just want to refer to Faith Mnisi's evidence that she thought that you belonged to an assassination group, can you ...(intervention)
MR SHABANGU: I beg your pardon.
MS COLERIDGE: She stated in the Court that you belonged to an assassination group. Can you comment on that?
MR SHABANGU: Who stated that in Court?
MS COLERIDGE: Faith Mnisi.
MR SHABANGU: And ...
MS COLERIDGE: I can turn to page 35 of the Bundle.
MR SHABANGU: Well, I can't comment, I can't comment on the strength of what is written here. Probably it would have been better if the person is here, so that I could cross-question her on that strength of evidence.
MS COLERIDGE: So you're basically denying that?
MR SHABANGU: Yes, I am.
MS COLERIDGE: Chairperson, I don't know if it's necessary for me to read that into the record, where she states that. Shall I read it into the record? Just at the top of ...(intervention)
MS QUNTA: Sorry, if I could just find out what the relevance of that allegation is in relation to the charges because the applicant has stated that the attack on Mr Mahule's house was meant not to kill him and explained that, so I wonder how relevant the question of an allegation by someone whom we don't know is.
MS COLERIDGE: Well, it's - Chairperson if I may respond to that, it's relevant in relation to the applicant and whether he in fact, well the allegation is put and it's before the Committee and it's part of the record that this person stated that she thought he was part of this assassination group and I just want to get some clarity.
CHAIRPERSON: She didn't say she thought he was part, what she said - that he told her that he had undergone military training in Angola and also that he was one of a group which was known as the assassination group, not that they were an assassination group, but that was apparently their title.
MS COLERIDGE: I just want to get his comment in relation to that.
MR SHABANGU: No comment.
MS COLERIDGE: Thank you Chairperson, I have no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS COLERIDGE
MR KOOPEDI: A few questions Chairperson, Honourable Committee members.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR KOOPEDI: Mr Shabangu, is it correct that during this relevant time, the late Joe Slovo was operating from Maputo and was in fact the overall Command of the front?
MR SHABANGU: Absolutely correct.
MR KOOPEDI: Is it also correct that although one could say you were responsible for your actions when you were in the country, but with regard to this particular incident you reported to the front in Maputo and you were in fact ordered to proceed with this attack?
MR SHABANGU: Correct, Sir.
MR KOOPEDI: Now another thing, will it be correct to say that in fact you yourself were attacked with a hand grenade some years after this incident, thrown at a window and you didn't die and the other five occupants of the house who were with you, didn't die?
MR SHABANGU: That's correct, Sir.
MR KOOPEDI: Now just a few other things. Do you think that you have told this Honourable Committee everything in relation to this incident for you to comply with the requirement of full disclosure?
MR SHABANGU: To the best of my knowledge, I think so.
MR KOOPEDI: And the last question - did you receive any financial or personal gain out of this operation?
MR SHABANGU: The only gain that I received is the democratic Government that is in order today.
MR KOOPEDI: No further questions, Chairperson.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR KOOPEDI
CHAIRPERSON: Re-examination?
MS QUNTA: No re-examination, Chair.
NO RE-EXAMINATION BY MS QUNTA
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Any further evidence on behalf of the applicant?
MS QUNTA: No further evidence Chairperson.
MS COLERIDGE: No other witnesses led Chairperson and I've spoken with Mr Mohale and he's not opposing and he also does not want to make a statement or any submission. Thank you Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: I gather it has been put on behalf of the ANC that they issued the instructions to the applicant to carry out this act.
MR KOOPEDI: That is indeed so and it is not denied by the ANC that they issued that instruction Chairperson, thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
MS QUNTA: May we be excused then, Chairperson?
CHAIRPERSON: Can you wait a minute? It is the practise for the Committee to reserve decisions and we will do so in this case, but I think if the applicant consults with his legal adviser she can tell him what she anticipates the decision will be in the light of the attitude of the other parties.
MS QUNTA: Thank you Chair.
CHAIRPERSON: That adjourns this matter.
MS COLERIDGE: Thank you Chairperson, I think we should - I don't know if it's a convenient time just to break now before we call the next applicant, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Alright if you want to get things organised. We'll take a short adjournment now.
WITNESS EXCUSED
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
