ON RESUMPTION
MR ROUX: Chairperson, in the matter of Bokaba, I request for the technicians to set the Tswana for my client. I do not know where it is and he will be testifying in Tswana.
INTERPRETER: Everything is set and we can start.
CHAIRPERSON: For the record, we are hearing the matter, the applicant being Sampina Hendrick Bokaba, and he's applying for amnesty for the killing of Andrew Makupe, Jackson Maake and Harold Sefolo. And further for the record and the completeness thereof, my name is Motata from the Transvaal Provincial Division. On my left I have Mr Malan from Johannesburg, and on my right I have Adv Sandi from East London, who constitute this Panel. I would request legal representatives in this matter as well to place their names on record.
MR ROUX: As it pleases you, Chairperson. I am Jaco Roux and I am appearing on behalf of Mr Bokaba in this matter, from the Pretoria Bar under instruction of Strydom Britz Attorneys in Pretoria.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
MR VAN DEN BERG: Thank you, Mr Chairperson. Eric van den Berg from attorneys Bell Dewar and Hall, on behalf of Mrs Maake, Mrs Makope and Mrs Sefolo, the widows and mother respectively of the deceased.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr van den Berg.
ADV STEENKAMP: Honourable Chairperson, my surname is Steenkamp, I'll be the Evidence Leader.
MR ROUX: Mr Bokaba, which language do you prefer to speak?
MR BOKABA: I'm going to use Tswana, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: May you please stand.
SAMPINA HENDRIK BOKABA: (sworn states)
CHAIRPERSON: You may proceed, Mr Roux.
EXAMINATION BY MR ROUX: Thank you, Chairperson.
Mr Bokaba, will you please look at the bundle before you, have you had the opportunity to study this bundle and to examine it?
MR BOKABA: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR ROUX: Will you please look at page 3, that is the beginning of your application, up to page 9. Can you confirm the content thereof?
MR BOKABA: I do, Chairperson.
MR ROUX: Will you look further at page 15 up to and including page 20, and confirm the contents thereof.
MR BOKABA: I do, Chairperson.
MR ROUX: It is your signature which appears at the bottom of page 20?
MR BOKABA: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR ROUX: Will you then look at page 45. Have you had the opportunity also to study this section of the bundle?
MR BOKABA: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR ROUX: Up to and including page 183, which includes among others, the evidence of Mr van Vuuren.
MR BOKABA: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR ROUX: Will you then also look at page 11 of the bundle which pertains to the factual summary of events. Will you explain to the Committee with regard to the incident Makupe, Makope(sic) and Sefolo in 1986, what was your knowledge of this and in what were you involved.
MR BOKABA: Chairperson, if I remember correctly it was in 1986, I was working at the Security Branch in Pretoria, before it was known as Northern Transvaal. I was assigned to work in Mamelodi under the command of Lieut Hechter. He was our Commander in Mamelodi, Paul van Vuuren was the Warrant Officer, Joe Mamasela was the Sergeant, Dennis Selahle was the Constable, I was also a Constable and all of us were working in Mamelodi, together with W/O van Wyk.
Together with W/O van Wyk in 1986, we recruited Jackson Maake to be our informer so that he will be able to supply us with information as he was a member of the Youth League in Mamelodi, and then again he was participating in various meeting of the ANC Youth League.
MR ROUX: This informer, Jackson Maake, you say that you and W/O van Wyk recruited him, was he paid for his services and what was he supposed to do?
MR BOKABA: He was paid to work for - to bring us the information in regard to some activists in Mamelodi, those who were involved in consumer boycotts, intimidation and to cause instability in Mamelodi.
MR ROUX: Very well, you may continue.
MR BOKABA: He agreed to work with us to be as an informer. He used to give us information. I don't remember which year W/O van Wyk was transferred to KwaZulu Natal, after he left to KwaZulu Natal he stated that Jackson Maake should be handled by Lieut Hechter and Paul van Vuuren. They handled him like their informer and therefore I did not continue with my handling.
On a particular year ...(intervention)
MR ROUX: Mr Bokaba, please slow down, I can hear that the interpreters are falling behind here and there. After you had handed over Jackson Maake to Hechter and van Vuuren under the order of van Wyk, you never again handled him as an informer.
MR BOKABA: That is correct, Chairperson.
ADV SANDI: Sorry, Mr Roux.
Did you see him at all after he was handed over to Hechter?
MR BOKABA: No, Chairperson, I saw him a particular point which I will come to it later.
MR ROUX: Very well, you may continue.
MR BOKABA: In a particular year, Lieut Hechter, Adjutant, W/O van Vuuren, Joe Mamasela, Dennis Selahle, they took Jackson, they said they were going to take him to Botswana to infiltrate the ANC there. They took him with the kombi. They were four. Then they left to Botswana side. Then I was not present in that group.
MR ROUX: This information that Jackson Maake was taken to Botswana, do you know this personally or was it told to you, and if so, by whom?
MR BOKABA: I was informed by Lieut Hechter and Paul van Vuuren.
MR ROUX: Very well, you may continue.
MR BOKABA: On a particular day whilst I was still in Mamelodi, Paul van Vuuren contacted me through a radio, then informed that Jackson Maake has returned from Botswana and that I should come to the office at Compol building to see him and greet him. It is true that I went to that particular office. When I arrived there they were together with him in the office, in Hechter's office. I greeted him, then after that I left that place.
Later, or on a particular day while I was still in Mamelodi, Lieut Hechter contacted me again through a radio, he informed me that I should come and meet them. I was driving a white Toyota Corolla, they were driving a minibus. He contacted me to come to them. They were outside Mamelodi.
I went to them and when I arrived there I found Lieut Hechter, W/O van Vuuren, Sgt Mamasela, Dennis Selahle and they were together with Jackson Maake in the car. Lieut Hechter gave me the instruction to keep an observation at Andrew's Mortuary, to observe as to whether Andrew is there or his car is present in that vicinity.
The reason for that observation was not given to me. As it was an instruction I went there and parked alongside the mortuary and did some observations. His car was not there and he was not seen in that area, then I contacted them that his car is not present there. He was driving a white Ford Tredia. Then I was instructed to stay there and observe as to whether he would arrive. Whilst I was still there, van Vuuren contacted me again that I should leave that premises and then again he has been found on a particular area in Mamelodi East. I was instructed to meet them at Pienaarsrivier, towards Warmbaths.
I left with my car, I drove through N1 towards Pienaarsrivier. I found them on the way and they were driving a minibus. Jackson Maake's car was driven by Joe Mamasela and the rest were in a minibus.
When we arrived at Pienaarsrivier, Lieut Hechter and Paul van Vuuren instructed me to follow them and that Joe Mamasela should follow us again. We followed them. We entered a certain bushveld, it looked like a farm. Paul van Vuuren arrived, then he opened the gate, then all cars went through that gate. We entered right in the bush.
We arrived at a certain place where there was a small zozo(?), it shows that there were water pipes there, or water taps there. The instruction was given that Jackson and Andrew should be taken out of the car and be put in that hut. Thereafter W/O van Vuuren handcuffed them inside and they were put in that zozo house.
I received an instruction together with Dennis Selahle that we should remain behind, the whole night there together with the two detainees, that we should not discuss anything with them. We took the kombi and parked it alongside the zozo house whilst the two detainees were inside the zozo house. They were not given blankets and then we were in the kombi without blankets. We stayed the whole night guarding them there.
Early in the morning, Lieut Hechter arrived together with Paul van Vuuren and Joe Mamasela. Andrew's car was parked there, it was left the whole night there and they used a white Skyline to go back and to return the following day.
When they arrived in the morning, Lieut Hechter informed us that we may leave to go home, to wash and change our clothes, then later in the afternoon we should come back. We left that area and then we went to our respective homes, we washed and changed clothes and returned.
It was around 4 o'clock when we returned. What I observed is that Andrew's hands were swollen, they were heavily swollen, that he was injured. What I observed on Andrew is that - I don't remember what happened to the other one. We were given instructions when we arrived by Lieut Hechter, that there is a certain information which they have received. It was induced through interrogation from Andrew. We were given the instruction that we should take Andrew to the public phones.
I together with Mamasela and Dennis Selahle, we drove to the public phones. I don't remember as to whether we found the public phones. We went to Pienaarsrivier and the telephones were not working there. The instruction which was given to Andrew was that when he phones Sefolo, he should tell Sefolo that two comrades will be coming from the ANC, they'll be coming to fetch him.
When we arrived at the telephone booth - and the person who was close to him and listening to the telephonic conversation, we were at the back and were able to listen to what Andrew was saying. When we arrived at the telephone booth - but Andrew was panicking at that time and we were able to observe that Mr Sefolo was worried on the other side, that he even asked Andrew as to whether why you seem to be panicking, but Andrew told him that "two comrades will coming to your place to fetch you with my car", but Sefolo told him that he's worried, but Andrew told him not to worry, that those two comrades would be using his car.
We returned, then we entered that bush again. Hechter was given the feedback that Sefolo was found and he was given the message. Dennis Selahle and Joe Mamasela were instructed to use Andrew's car. Dennis Selahle was the driver of the white Tredia. The instruction was that they should go and kidnap Mr Sefolo in Witbank, but they were followed by Paul van Vuuren and Jacques Hechter. I was left behind so that I will be able to guard Andrew and Jackson whilst they were still in that zozo house.
Later in the middle of the night the cars arrived. They brought Mr Sefolo, then he was taken again in that zozo house and he was handcuffed. We were given the instruction again that we should leave(?) behind, I and Dennis Selahle were instructed to remain and they came the following day.
They went to their various places and the following day they returned. Then immediately Mr Sefolo was interrogated because the two, that is Maake and Andrew, were interrogated the previous day. They began by interrogating Mr Sefolo. At that time we were in the kombi.
Whilst they were interrogating Mr Sefolo, Paul van Vuuren started by saying - Mr Sefolo was hefty and he was brave enough to deny what he was told, but they told him that they were going to use a particular method. That is, Paul van Vuuren was talking to him. There was a generator somewhere near that zozo house, Paul van Vuuren - it was connected with a cable, then when - at the end it had two cables. They started with Jackson, they were in the zozo house, all of them were handcuffed.
They started with Jackson. They put those Y(?) cables on Andrew and then the machine was ignited and therefore Sefolo ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Not Mr Sefolo, Jackson.
MR BOKABA: After they finished with Andrew - I beg your pardon, that's Jackson, van Vuuren explained to Mr Sefolo that "did you see what happened to that one if you're not telling us the truth?" But Mr Sefolo kept on denying. Then they tied Andrew the same way, then Paul van Vuuren told him that "we're going to do the same thing with your friend, if you're not telling us the truth you're going to follow him." Then he tied him with those electric cables, then he started the machine, then Andrew died the same way as Jackson.
Then thereafter they told Mr Sefolo that "did you see how your two friends have died?" Then he responded by saying "yes, I did, but is left is that the truth one day would come out and before you kill me, I'm going to request that I should sing Nkosi Sikelele." Then they acceded to the request, then after he finished he was tied with the cables and then they killed him. Then we had three corpses on the scene. Paul van Vuuren and Hechter ...(intervention)
MR ROUX: At this stage would you please mention, I do not recall whether you have - I am having a little bit of trouble with the interpretation simultaneously. Did Mr Sefolo supply any information because of the shocks that were administered to the other persons? I beg your pardon, Chairperson, I'm having trouble with the interpretation. It is a bit difficult with my client next to me who speaks loudly, I did not hear something quite properly.
Mr Bokaba, during the administering of these shocks to Mr Maake and Makupe, did Mr Makupe supply any information and consequently, Mr Sefolo, with the shocks that were administered to them?
MR BOKABA: Are you say Mr Makupe or Mr Sefolo? Are you referring to them both? Are you referring to them both as to whether they gave information or not?
MR ROUX: Yes, both of them, Mr Makupe and consequently, Mr Sefolo.
MR BOKABA: Let me start with Mr Makupe. Mr Makupe was interrogated the previous day and we were not present then. During the interrogation of Mr Sefolo we were present. If I remember well he agreed yes, that he was a member of the ANC. He agreed to that, that he was a member of the ANC. But because I was moving in and out during the interrogation, because it was not easy to experience that kind of interrogation if you see it for the first time. I don't remember as to whether he gave further information, Chairperson, but I remember that he agreed that he was a member of the ANC, that is why he requested that he should sing Nkosi Sikelele.
MR ROUX: At that stage Mr Bokaba, when you saw these incidents taking place around you - could you just go one step back, you were a Constable at that stage at Security Branch, is that correct?
MR BOKABA: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR ROUX: Did you have any capacity to question van Vuuren as a Warrant Officer and then Hechter?
MR BOKABA: I have no power, Chairperson.
MR ROUX: ... keeping in mind of what you saw happening ...(intervention)
TSWANA INTERPRETER: Just a moment, Chairperson.
INTERFERENCE ON MICROPHONES
MR ROUX: ... did you associate yourself with the actions that had taken place there and the death of these three persons?
TSWANA INTERPRETER: May you restart the question, Chairperson, because we had a disturbance.
MR ROUX: I apologise.
CHAIRPERSON: Apparently they had a disturbance, now it has been sorted out. You may restate the - they did not hear your question to Mr Bokaba.
MR ROUX: Thank you, Chairperson.
Did you, Mr Bokaba, seen in the light of what was happening there, the death of three persons in the manner in which they died, did you associate yourself with it and reconcile yourself with the conduct of those three persons and your involvement therewith?
MR BOKABA: Yes, that is correct, Chairperson.
ADV SANDI: Can I ask you why, why did you associate yourself with the killing of those people in the scene you've described?
MR BOKABA: During that time we would say we were involved in a war situation. Inside the townships there were situations of war, people were killing one another.
ADV SANDI: Thank you, Mr Roux.
MR ROUX: Thank you, Chairperson.
Can you explain what was done with the corpses, the second part of this story.
MR BOKABA: Lieut Hechter and Paul van Vuuren went inside the car and left. Hechter told us that he's going to the office to fetch a landmine. It is true, they left and they returned. When they came back we were instructed that we should take the corpses inside the kombi. That is a Mitsubishi Husky kombi and the windows were tinted.
We put them between the two seats. They were put on top of one another. There was a flag which came from Joe Mamasela's car, it was an ANC flag, and the corpses were covered with that flag inside the kombi. W/O van Vuuren drove the kombi, Hechter, myself and Dennis Selahle and Joe Mamasela, all of us we went inside the kombi. We left to a particular place which I would not be able to explain, but it was somewhere in Bophuthatswana.
On our way we arrived at a certain place which was a forest. It was at night because I'm not able to explain the direction towards that place. Along the way on the gravel road, Hechter instructed van Vuuren to stop. After that Hechter took a landmine and put it alongside the - in the middle of the road. We were instructed that we should take those corpses and put them on top of the landmine and we should put them on top of each other. From there we were instructed to go inside the kombi. The kombi was idling all the time. Then from there the landmine was detonated, then he ran inside the kombi, then instructed van Vuuren to drive and leave the scene. We returned to fetch our cars where we left them in that forest.
MR ROUX: Did you - with this conduct of your colleagues, their destruction of the corpses by use of a landmine, did you associate yourself with this conduct, Mr Bokaba?
MR BOKABA: Yes, I associated myself with that conduct, Chairperson.
MR ROUX: Mr Bokaba, what would have been the purpose of destroying these three corpses by means of a landmine?
MR BOKABA: The objective was to destroy the evidence, so that there will be no trace as to their whereabouts.
MR ROUX: Thank you, Chairperson, that would be the evidence.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR ROUX
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Roux. Mr van den Berg, any cross-examination?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR VAN DEN BERG: Thank you, Mr Chairperson, I have a couple of questions.
Mr Bokaba, I want to ask you some questions relating particularly to the aspect of Mr Maake as an informer. As background to that, did you handle many informers?
MR BOKABA: I was not handling many informers. As I was a Constable, I was put with a senior officer like W/O van Wyk, who was a senior to me. The person who was handling informers was him and I was a co-handler of them and him.
MR VAN DEN BERG: And are you able to estimate how many informers there were that you and Mr van Wyk handled?
MR BOKABA: If I remember well there may be five to six informers.
MR VAN DEN BERG: Now we know from the evidence led previously before the Amnesty Committee, that there were essentially two types of informers, there were those who were registered informers and who were paid a monthly allowance, is that correct?
MR BOKABA: Yes, that is correct, they were called NTs. They would give you NT, that is Northern Transvaal, then they would give you a number, that is 300. Those who were registered were given the NT and the number.
MR VAN DEN BERG: And then secondly, there were informers who you made use of on the occasion and they were paid on the occasion when you used them. They were kind of ad hoc informers, not registered. Is that correct?
MR BOKABA: I did not handle any ad hoc informer, but I know that there were such informers.
MR VAN DEN BERG: Can I then assume from that question that Mr Maake was a registered informer?
MR BOKABA: Yes, he was a registered informer.
MR VAN DEN BERG: Do you recall his registration number?
MR BOKABA: That's a difficult question, Chairperson, I don't remember the registration number.
MR VAN DEN BERG: For how long did you handle Mr Maake as an informer? That is the period that you and Mr van Wyk were his handlers until he was transferred from yourselves to Hechter and van Vuuren? Can you guess how long that was?
MR BOKABA: I don't remember well, Chairperson, but if I may estimate it would be two to three years, but I don't remember well.
MR VAN DEN BERG: Can I take an instruction, Mr Chairperson?
CHAIRPERSON: Certainly.
MR VAN DEN BERG: Thank you, I just wanted to check that I had my facts correct. I'm indebted, Mr Chairperson.
At the time that Mr Maake disappeared, the time that his mother last saw him he was 18 years old, do you agree with that?
MR BOKABA: It is possible, Chairperson, he was still a young person.
MR VAN DEN BERG: And so when you recruited him he would have been about 14/15?
MR BOKABA: I would say he was around 14 to 15 years, but I don't remember very well.
MR VAN DEN BERG: He was a schoolboy.
MR BOKABA: I don't remember well, but it seems he was a student then.
MR VAN DEN BERG: Under what circumstances did you come to recruit him?
MR BOKABA: Jackson was detained by members of the South African Defence Force. There was a joint operational room where members of the SADF and the Police used to work in, then they used to patrol Mamelodi together. They were assigned to patrol Mamelodi and control the violence in that particular area. If I remember well, there was a time when he was detained by the South African Defence Force on the road. It was a group of them.
Then thereafter W/O van Wyk was called to talk to them, then he took me with to Mamelodi and when we arrived there we took him to a particular outside room, then thereafter we talked to him. Whilst we were discussing with him we recruited him to give us information in regard to political activities like consumer boycotts, any information he would give us in that regard. He agreed that he will do that, that he will work with us. Then he was recruited at that particular time under those circumstances.
MR VAN DEN BERG: Now the period after he was handed over to Hechter and van Vuuren to the next time you saw him, which was when you'd gong to greet him, according to your evidence, after he returned from Botswana, how long would you say that period was?
MR BOKABA: It's a long time, but I don't remember the duration.
MR VAN DEN BERG: A long time? A year, eighteen months, two years?
MR BOKABA: I would estimate to six months. I just estimate, but that is not the exact duration.
MR VAN DEN BERG: And then the period between that meeting when he allegedly returned from Botswana, to the time when you saw him, which was the time which led to his death, what was the time period there?
MR BOKABA: I don't remember, Chairperson.
MR VAN DEN BERG: Can you estimate, can you guess?
MR BOKABA: May you please rephrase your question so that I will be able to understand it.
MR VAN DEN BERG: Would you say that the period between when you saw him to greet him after he came back from Botswana, and the time when he died, would you say that that was a month, two months, six months, a year, two years?
MR BOKABA: It's a short period, it would be a period of a week or two weeks.
MR VAN DEN BERG: That meeting that you had with him when allegedly he returned from Botswana, did you discuss what he had gone to do in Botswana?
MR BOKABA: No, Chairperson, we did not discuss about anything in that regard, I just greeted him and left the office.
MR VAN DEN BERG: Do I understand your evidence then correctly that you were summonsed, I think you said by Mr van Vuuren, to come and greet Mr Maake, that you came all the way from Mamelodi into Pretoria, walked into the office, said "hello Jackson" and then left, is that correct?
MR BOKABA: Let me explain it well. I was contacted in Mamelodi that Jackson arrived, then I was on my way to the office because usually when we knock off at 4 o'clock we'd go to that office for a parade, and when I arrived there I greeted him and went to the office, I didn't go back to Mamelodi immediately, but I was on my way to the office.
MR VAN DEN BERG: So it just happened to be that you were at the office at the same time that Mr Maake was there, that's the only reason that you greeted him, it wasn't as if you made a special trip?
MR BOKABA: I was not in the office at that particular time, I was contacted by W/O van Vuuren that Jackson had returned from Botswana and then he's in the office, I should come and greet him. And then again because I was still going to be on my way to the office, therefore I went to the office and greeted him in Hechter's office and then I greeted him together with van Vuuren.
MR VAN DEN BERG: Now did you discuss Mr Maake with Hechter or with van Vuuren, as to the fact that he had been to Botswana and what had happened to him there?
MR BOKABA: No, Chairperson, I did not.
MR VAN DEN BERG: Did you enquire from Hechter and van Vuuren as to whether Maake was still providing useful information?
CHAIRPERSON: Could we just wait for a second, let the technicians deal with this irritating noise.
INTERPRETER: We may try now.
CHAIRPERSON: It's okay now, you may proceed.
MR VAN DEN BERG: Thank you, Mr Chairperson.
Mr Bokaba, I was asking you whether you had discussed with Hechter and van Vuuren after the time that Mr Maake returned from Botswana, whether Mr Maake was still providing useful information or not.
MR BOKABA: I did not discuss with them about Mr Maake.
MR VAN DEN BERG: Did you gain from them the impression that he was still a useful informer?
MR BOKABA: May you please repeat the question.
MR VAN DEN BERG: Was anything said to you by Hechter and van Vuuren which suggested that Mr Maake was still of use to them? Either by what they said or by their conduct in respect of him.
MR BOKABA: They did not - I was not informed either for or against. At the time when I greeted him, I did not discuss anything with them and then again I did not enquire about Mr Maake, about anything, and they did not inform me in that regard. I just went in, I greeted him, then I left Maake and then in the office.
MR VAN DEN BERG: Now when you were led in your evidence-in-chief, you confirmed that you had read the bundle and that you confirmed that you had read portions of the evidence which was led previously in the applications of Mr Hechter and Mr van Vuuren. Do you recall giving that evidence?
MR BOKABA: I would say I read part of van Vuuren's evidence and a part of Hechter's evidence.
MR VAN DEN BERG: So you are aware - and this is really just for the record, you are aware that Mrs Maake denies that her son ever left the country.
MR BOKABA: I saw all the evidence that she denies that her child left the country to Botswana.
ADV SANDI: Just on that. Do you have any comment to make on that, that the mother of the deceased is denying that he ever left the country? What have you got to say on that?
MR BOKABA: I would say to the dear mother that when Hechter and company took him, Paul van Vuuren informed me that they were taking him to Botswana, they were taking him through Ramatlabana border gate. That is the information I received from Hechter and van Vuuren. If it's true that he did not go through to Botswana, I don't know, but the last information I had from them is that he was taken to Botswana.
ADV SANDI: Just on this issue. Before van Vuuren told you that they were taking him to Botswana, how regularly did you see him around that area? Did you see him frequently or did you seldom see him around?
MR BOKABA: I was not seeing him because he was under the control of van Vuuren and Hechter at that time, so those were the ones who used to meet him.
ADV SANDI: Thank you, Mr van den Berg.
MR VAN DEN BERG: Thank you, Mr Chairperson.
Now the occasion on which you met Mr Maake, and then he was in the presence of Hechter and van Vuuren in the minibus, you recall that, and you were given an instruction to go and watch the funeral parlour of Mr Makupe, what was the instruction?
MR BOKABA: I stated that I was not only given, the instruction was that I should go there to the funeral parlour and then keep an observation, if I may see Andrew's car or Andrew "contact us through the radio." I was not given the reason why I should do those observations there. It came from Lieut Hechter.
MR VAN DEN BERG: Was Mr Makupe somebody that you had come across in your investigations previously?
MR BOKABA: I myself never received any information in regard to Andrew Makupe, but there was knowledge that Andrew's brother was in exile as a member of the ANC.
MR VAN DEN BERG: Had you met Mr Makupe prior to that particular day?
MR BOKABA: Do you mean the father, Sir?
MR VAN DEN BERG: Andrew Makupe.
MR BOKABA: I knew Andrew before as I was familiar with Mamelodi and I used to pass through the funeral parlour, but we never introduced one another.
ADV SANDI: Sorry, Mr van den Berg, maybe you'll be asking a question on a different aspect.
Tell us what did you know about Andrew Makupe.
MR BOKABA: I knew Andrew as he was staying at that funeral parlour, but furthermore I did not know anything, I did not know as to whether he was involved in any political activities or not.
ADV SANDI: Thank you
MR VAN DEN BERG: Once you had gone to the place where the zozo hut was and you were then left to guard Mr Makupe and Mr Maake, you said that you were given instruction not to discuss anything with them, did you in fact discuss anything with them?
MR BOKABA: No, Chairperson, not at all. Andrew knew Dennis Selahle and I believed that Dennis Selahle grew up in Mamelodi and then they knew each other very well. Andrew tried to request for a favour, but because we were instructed that we should not discuss anything with them, it is true that we did not have any communication with him at all.
MR VAN DEN BERG: Was the fact that Mr Selahle was employed by the Security Police, a common known factor in Mamelodi?
MR BOKABA: Andrew or Dennis?
MR VAN DEN BERG: Sorry, Selahle.
MR BOKABA: Yes, it was known that he was a member of the Security Branch.
MR VAN DEN BERG: Were you at all surprised about the position which Jackson Maake now found himself in?
MR BOKABA: I don't understand your question, may you rephrase it.
MR VAN DEN BERG: Were you surprised that Mr Maake was no in police detention?
MR BOKABA: I was not surprised because I knew that Jackson Maake was Hechter and van Vuuren's informer. I was not surprised when he was with them.
MR VAN DEN BERG: But were you surprised that he was now being kept overnight in the zozo hut, handcuffed, in the presence of somebody who you knew was related to the ANC?
MR BOKABA: Yes, I was surprised that he was handcuffed and knowing that he was an informer I didn't know what is the source of the problem that he should be handcuffed. I don't know how to put it, but I knew that he was an informer, then I was surprised that he was detained.
ADV SANDI: Did Selahle know that he was an informer?
MR BOKABA: Yes, Mr Selahle knew. I've already explained Chairperson, that Hechter and Paul van Vuuren and Joe Mamasela, Dennis Selahle, the four of them were the ones who took Jackson to Botswana, so therefore he knew.
ADV SANDI: But in the light of him knowing that he was an informer, what did he - did he make any comment about what was happening there?
MR BOKABA: Selahle did not comment.
ADV SANDI: I'm talking about the stage when it was yourself and Selahle, you were taking guard over these people, did you have any conversation, yourself and Selahle?
MR BOKABA: Yes, we had a discussion, we were discussing on our own and that we were surprised that why did they detain, why they handcuffed Jackson in that way. But whilst we were discussing, Selahle came to a point that Jackson he did not skip the country as it was stated before. The way I was explained by Mr Selahle, he lied to them that he crossed the border to the Botswana, but he was lying. Maybe he was murdered because he lied to them because he was close to Hechter.
ADV SANDI: Thank you, Mr van den Berg.
MR VAN DEN BERG: Did I understand that last answer to be to the effect that from Selahle you learnt that Mr Maake had in fact never left the country, or had not left the country for Botswana at the time that he was alleged to have done so, by van Vuuren?
MR BOKABA: Do you mean Andrew or Jackson?
MR VAN DEN BERG: Jackson.
MR BOKABA: Yes, in terms of Selahle's understanding it is like that. As it was stated that he went to Botswana, he lied to Hechter that he crossed the border, but he did not.
MR VAN DEN BERG: These questions which you now had about Jackson Maake, did you take those up with either Hechter or van Vuuren? The situation that you now had an informer who was handcuffed?
MR BOKABA: I had no authority to question them or to ask them anything in that regard, Chairperson, the instruction from the senior officer remained an instruction, you would just obey that instruction and that would be the end of it.
MR VAN DEN BERG: And you didn't try and satisfy your curiosity as to Jackson Maake's changed circumstances?
MR BOKABA: You'd only be surprised but there would be nothing you would do.
MR VAN DEN BERG: The place at which the bodies were disposed of, would I be correct if I said to you that the closest police station to that place was Jericho?
MR BOKABA: It is possible, but I don't know that area, it was at night, I knew only that it was somewhere in Bophuthatswana.
MR VAN DEN BERG: You see the wives and the mother have been with Mr Mamasela, to the place at which the bodies were disposed of and that is apparently what Mr Mamasela says, is that it was close to a place called Jericho. That was the one aspect. You can't comment on that?
MR BOKABA: It is possible, but I don't know Jericho. It is true that it is near Jericho, as Mamasela stated.
MR VAN DEN BERG: And then the second aspect ...(intervention)
MR MALAN: Sorry, just before you proceed.
Can you remember which road you took that night when you took the bodies away?
MR BOKABA: I don't remember the road, Chairperson.
MR MALAN: Can you recall whether you travelled through Brits?
MR BOKABA: I don't remember, Chairperson.
MR MALAN: Thank you, Mr van den Berg.
MR VAN DEN BERG: Thank you.
Before the bodies were destroyed, were they mutilated in any other way?
MR BOKABA: As I've already stated, the bodies were affected by electric shocks, Andrew's hands were swollen. Those were the injuries they have sustained, if I remember well.
MR VAN DEN BERG: I'm sorry to take this further, but were the bodies still intact, all the limbs attached to the bodies, the heads still attached to the bodies before they were destroyed?
MR BOKABA: That is correct, Chairperson.
MR VAN DEN BERG: You see, Mamasela made the allegation to the wives and to the mother concerned, that the arms had been amputated and that the hands were not with the bodies when they were destroyed, can you comment on that?
MR BOKABA: I dispute that, Chairperson.
MR VAN DEN BERG: Then there are two last aspects, Mr Bokaba. Firstly, according to Mr Mamasela the three people, Mr Maake, Mr Makupe and Mr Sefolo, were not killed near Pienaarsrivier but they were killed at a place called Donkerhoek, can you comment on that?
MR BOKABA: He's lying, Chairperson.
MR VAN DEN BERG: And then the final aspect pertains to Mr Makupe's motor vehicle, the Tredia. Do you know what became of that?
MR BOKABA: I don't know what happened to that car later, Chairperson, I would be lying, I don't know what happened.
MR VAN DEN BERG: Where was the last place that you saw it?
MR BOKABA: I saw it for the last time when we collected our cars. Joe Mamasela went into that car together with Paul van Vuuren and Hechter and they followed each other. I and Selahle were staying in Mamelodi, I was staying at Mamelodi Police barracks, and he was staying at his place, so we drove together. I don't know what is the end, what happened to that car, but the car was driven by Mr Mamasela.
MR VAN DEN BERG: You can't comment on whether that motor vehicle was in turn handed over to a person called de Kock, not Eugene de Kock, but another policeman called de Kock?
MR BOKABA: I have no comment in that regard, Chairperson, because I don't know what happened to it.
MR VAN DEN BERG: Might I take an instruction, Mr Chairperson?
CHAIRPERSON: Certainly, Mr van den Berg.
MR ROUX: Chairperson, while Mr van den Berg has been taken instructions I have seen that the interpreters have been signalling and I would also appreciate a short adjournment.
CHAIRPERSON: It would appear Mr van den Berg is not going to be long, but let's find out from Mr van den Berg. How long more are you going to be with the witness?
MR VAN DEN BERG: There are two aspects which I've been asked to canvass, the one relates to personal items which the deceased had on them prior to their disappearance and I don't think that that would take terribly long.
CHAIRPERSON: You don't think that it would take terribly long, or long? I want to make a decision whether we should give them the five minutes now, depending on how long you are going to take. It's within your province because you are the cross-examiner.
TSWANA INTERPRETER: You may finish, Chairperson.
MR VAN DEN BERG: I think it will take no more than two or three minutes. I think it might be preferable if we finished that up and then took a break before Mr Steenkamp has an opportunity.
CHAIRPERSON: You may proceed, they have conceded that we can.
MR VAN DEN BERG: Mr Bokaba, both Mrs Sefolo and Mrs Makupe say that their husbands had on them various personal possession, wristwatches, in the case of Mr Sefolo, a bank book with some money in it, a considerable sum of money, Mr Makupe had with him all of his business documents including a business cheque book. Do you know what became of those possessions?
MR BOKABA: I don't know what happened to those properties, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Did you see such items, that is the cheque books, the cash and business documents? Did you see them on them?
MR BOKABA: I did not see them, Chairperson.
ADV SANDI: Yes, but did you see any items at all in the possession of these people?
MR BOKABA: I did not see anything, any item on them, Chairperson.
ADV SANDI: No wristwatch, no ring, nothing?
MR BOKABA: I did not see them, Chairperson. I did not see them. I did not see them myself, I would be lying if I said I saw them.
ADV SANDI: Not even money in their pockets?
MR BOKABA: Chairperson, I did not see them. I don't know what happened to them because I was guard and other members used to come closer to them. Maybe they saw them, but I did not.
MR VAN DEN BERG: Then do I understand your evidence correctly that - let me put it to you as an open-ended question. What in your mind was the reason that these three people were killed?
MR BOKABA: It is because they were destroying the evidence, because the way they were so injured maybe Hechter was afraid to release them with those injuries, that if they were released with those injuries they will go to the media or to the police to report, maybe they were trying to destroy the evidence because of the injuries.
CHAIRPERSON: Allow me a moment, Mr van den Berg.
Other than the injuries caused by the electrocution, did you see physical injuries on the three gentlemen? Other than the electrocution that caused their death. Because if I followed what you said it's that thereafter when you loaded them into the kombi, their hands were swollen, but other than that, that is prior to them being electrocuted, did they have any other injuries, visible injuries?
MR BOKABA: No, Chairperson, they were not injured. My explanation is that the injuries I was able to observe, particularly on Andrew, was when we returned from Mamelodi to that particular area, when we came back from home.
CHAIRPERSON: What injuries did you see on Andrew?
MR BOKABA: His hands were swollen, Chairperson. When we returned from Mamelodi after we changed our clothes, we observed his hands that they were severely swollen. His hands were severely swollen.
CHAIRPERSON: Were they swollen to an extent that they would raise eyebrows if you were released back into the community?
MR BOKABA: That is correct, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr van den Berg, I'm sorry for interrupting you.
MR VAN DEN BERG: Mr Chairperson, there is one other aspect, now looking at the papers, that I wanted to go on to and it's completely unrelated to what we've done, so perhaps this would be an appropriate time to take a short adjournment.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. We'll take a short adjournment, not more than 10 minutes for the interpreters to catch their breath. We are adjourned.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION
SAMPINA HENDRIK BOKABA: (s.u.o.)
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR VAN DEN BERG: (Cont)
Thank you, Mr Chairperson.
Mr Bokaba, in your presence, were either Jackson Maake or Andrew Makupe assaulted or cut with a knife? Particularly in their faces.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Bokaba firstly, ...(no English interpretation)
MR BOKABA: I will state it this way, I've already explained that when Jackson and Andrew were interrogated, I and Dennis Selahle were not present, we were in Mamelodi to change our clothes. When we returned, the injuries which I remember and I observed, were those which were on Andrew's hands.
MR VAN DEN BERG: And now that I've put this aspect to you, does that jog your memory at all?
MR BOKABA: I did not observe injuries on the face.
MR VAN DEN BERG: Thank you, Mr Chairperson, I have no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VAN DEN BERG
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr van den Berg. Mr Steenkamp.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY ADV STEENKAMP: Thank you, Honourable Chairperson. Flowing from a question from my colleague, Mr Bokaba, according to the testimony of Mr van Vuuren on page 103 of the bundle - if you can just have a look at that - there is a question by the then Chairperson, Honourable Judge Ngoepe, asking the question
"Whether or not the reason for killing, (referring to all three of the deceased), was that he wanted to exterminate the cell. Are you agreeing to that?"
Then his answer -
"This was indeed the main reason."
Do you agree with that testimony of Mr van Vuuren?
MR BOKABA: That has been stated by Mr van Vuuren, but I agree with, I concur with that reason because maybe it could have been their intention to do that.
ADV STEENKAMP: Then my last question. When the deceased were interrogated, was some interpreter used or in what language did they speak, and who was the interpreter?
MR BOKABA: At the time when Andrew and Jackson were interrogated we were not present. At the time when Mr Sefolo was interrogated, Joe Mamasela was present and he was speaking Afrikaans to - in Setstwana to interpret for him and Hechter and van Vuuren were using English, and they understood.
ADV STEENKAMP: Thank you, Chairperson, those are my questions. Thank you.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR STEENKAMP
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Bokaba, just from the question asked by Adv Steenkamp, you at a stage said you think the reason why they were killed was to - rather I'll put it this way, that they had these injuries and particularly Andrew, that he should not be seen by the community. That is your reason, and the reason by van Vuuren is that they wanted to exterminate the cell in which they belonged. You concur with van Vuuren, but are you saying that's his reason or the main reason is that Andrew for instance, was so badly swollen on his hands that it would have raised eyebrows in the community?
MR BOKABA: Chairperson, if I understand you well, van Vuuren and Hechter did not give us the reason why they murdered these people, that is why I said maybe that was their intention to do that. But I, Chairperson, my understanding to state it, when I speculated about the intention for them to be killed, it's that they were trying to erase evidence by killing them. But this is their understanding. Because they did not share their intentions with us, I would say I would concur with the decision, though they did not share them with us as it has been stated by van Vuuren.
CHAIRPERSON: Adv Sandi, do you have any questions to put to the witness?
ADV SANDI: Yes, I do, Mr Chairman, thank you.
Mr Bokaba, would it be a fair statement to say that Jackson Maake was quite known to you?
MR BOKABA: Yes, I knew him.
ADV SANDI: Had you been monitoring him before he was recruited to become an informer?
MR BOKABA: Let me put it this way, Chairperson, I knew him when we were called to the police station by members of the South African Defence Force, from then I started to know him, but before I did not know him, and then I did not have any information or contact with him or about him.
ADV SANDI: In the course of his functions as an informer, did he supply information to you, to you personally?
MR BOKABA: I used to go with W/O van Dyk, with him to meet him, but I would not - I don't remember well as to whether he gave us a particular information, but he used to give us some information when we met him.
ADV SANDI: Did it ever happen that he would meet just yourself, without van Dyk or Hechter, and supply you with information?
MR BOKABA: At all times - let me explain to the Chairperson about the culture of our work. We as black members who were working at Security Branch, there was a tendency that we were not handling informers per se, you would be paired with a white officer to handle informers. When it comes to briefing and debriefing about informers, they would do that themselves but you'd be there as an observer, that maybe if they don't understand you'd be able to interpret for them, but the briefing and the debriefing was done by white officers.
ADV SANDI: In your day-to-day interaction with van Wyk initially and later Hechter, who were handling Jackson as their informers, did they ever say to you what sort of an informer he was?
MR BOKABA: They did not say anything to me. Let me put it this way, there was a culture that you should not know what the right hand is doing, it was - they used to protect the information from us, so were not exposed to that information or to the handling of informers.
ADV SANDI: Do you know if Jackson could drive a car?
MR BOKABA: I don't know, Chairperson.
ADV SANDI: Do you know if a vehicle had ever been made available to him by your colleagues, so that he could function as an informer?
MR BOKABA: I don't know that, Chairperson, I'd be lying if I said I knew.
ADV SANDI: Did you know Mr Sefolo before this incident occurred?
MR BOKABA: I did not know him before, Chairperson. He was taken from Witbank, I saw him on that particular night for the first time, when he came with Joe Mamasela. That was the first time I saw him.
ADV SANDI: If one of your colleagues who allege that they were working with Jackson Maake, says they arranged a car for him, they even secured a driver's licence for him, would that come as a surprise to you?
MR BOKABA: It is possible, Chairperson, but I did not have the information that he was issued with a driver's licence or a car. There were those who were given cars, but I would be lying if I said I saw him driving a car or as to whether he was issued with a driver's licence.
ADV SANDI: Have you ever heard anyone saying he had seen him driving a car somewhere?
MR BOKABA: I saw on Paul van Vuuren's evidence, that was for the first time I saw that, but I know nothing about that.
ADV SANDI: Concerning payment arrangements to informers, would that have been known to you, how these people would get paid?
MR BOKABA: They were paid according to their production. You were forced that when the informer's paid you would go together with two policemen. The handler used to sign as a handler that he has paid and then the informer used to sign to confirm that he has been paid, then the other one used to sign that he was present when the informer was paid and then there was a period when the informers were paid. I don't know as to whether it was after a month or maybe after some weeks.
ADV SANDI: If one of your colleagues who had testified before this Committee - it appears somewhere in this bundle, but I cannot locate the exact place where it is, Jackson Maake one of the problems, started coming to the Security Police without any advice, he would just come in without giving any notice. Would that come as a surprise to you as well?
MR BOKABA: Chairperson, it is possible that he used to come to our offices without me seeing him. Where we used to go to the offices in the morning, then we would go to a parade, then each and every one of us would submit any information on his possession and thereafter we would go to our cars and go to the - our field to do our field work. As to whether he'd come to the offices whatever time, I would not know that because I'd be on the field on that particular time.
ADV SANDI: In other words, you are not aware that one of the problems your colleagues who testified before this Committee had about Jackson Maake, was that he would just come to the office without any notice? You are not aware of that problem about him.
MR BOKABA: I would not know that, Chairperson, I saw that on Paul van Vuuren's evidence, but I did not know that. But I personally, I did not see him unannounced at our offices because in many times we used to be on field work.
ADV SANDI: You also didn't know that - what is the position, are you aware that there was a suspicion that he was a double-agent, he was coming to those offices unannounced because he was working for the other side? Are you aware of that?
MR BOKABA: I don't know that, Chairperson.
ADV SANDI: Tell me, what was the common practice, if there was a suspicion that a particular informer had actually infiltrated the police, would members of the Security Police in that office be informed to be on the alert, to watch this person? What was the practice, would you not have been informed that look this person is behaving in a suspicious way, you have to be careful here?
MR BOKABA: As I've already stated, Chairperson, that we were restricted to many things, I don't want to hide that we did have access to some other things. If the handler observed that the person created suspicion, whatever decision he'd take he would not share that with us, but they would discuss that amongst themselves, then they would carry on with the particular decision without us being informed.
ADV SANDI: And finally, do you know if he was attending school at the time of the occurrence of this incident? Do you know if he was a scholar?
MR BOKABA: If I remember well, at that time he was not attending school, in terms of the information given to me that he was in Botswana.
ADV SANDI: Thank you, Mr Chairman. Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Malan.
MR MALAN: I have no questions, thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: Any re-examination, Mr Roux.
MR ROUX: Thank you, nothing Mr Chairperson.
NO RE-EXAMINATION BY MR ROUX
CHAIRPERSON: That is your case.
MR ROUX: That is indeed my case, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Are you going to lead any evidence?
MR VAN DEN BERG: Mr Chairperson, I've just been handed a note which I haven't had a chance to have a look at, it wasn't my intention to, but I understand Mr Steenkamp has something he wishes to raise with you.
ADV STEENKAMP: Mr Chairman, the quote that Adv Sandi was looking for is on page 71, starting at the bottom of page 70 till l71. Thank you, Honourable Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Bokaba, you are excused.
MR BOKABA: Thank you, Chairperson.
WITNESS EXCUSED
CHAIRPERSON: What's your position, Mr van den Berg.
MR VAN DEN BERG: There'll be no evidence from the families, that evidence is before you in the bundle and it would simply be a repeat thereof. I've put the new information to this particular witness but without Mamasela, that's the kind of weight we can attach to it.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. So gentlemen, are we ready to argue shortly?
MR ROUX: Yes, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Are you ready, Mr van den Berg?
MR VAN DEN BERG: I am.
CHAIRPERSON: Then we shall do so and start with you, Mr Roux, as would be the practice.
MR ROUX IN ARGUMENT: Thank you, Chairperson. If you would just grant me one moment.
Chairperson, in the bundle before you on page 196 thereof, you will note that the specific offences which emanate from these facts have been granted amnesty for -and this the decision regarding Jacques Hechter, I do not wish to fix your attention upon which offences must specifically be granted amnesty for, but I would submit that it ought to be the same as (a) to (e) on 196 and possibly with the insertion once again of the general any other offence which may emanate from the facts, offence, criminal action or delict.
CHAIRPERSON: In other words, you are saying this decision you've referred us to is not in order to persuade us, we should weigh the facts here and if we are satisfied and we are inclined to give amnesty, we should look at what was given?
MR ROUX: That is correct.
Then Chairperson I submit with respect, that all the prerequisites of the Act have been appropriately fulfilled as it appears from the evidence given by Mr Bokaba. Mr Bokaba's position was that he was a Constable, his unequivocal evidence - and I do believe that in many instances during the past and during previous hearings it has been clearly testified on, he was a Constable, and furthermore he was a black Constable, his duties involved the execution of orders, no questions were asked.
And with regard to the action in this particular case, his role was somewhat different to the roles of Hechter, van Vuuren and Mamasela, when it comes to this particular set of facts. The first section of his role merely involved the observation of Makupe and his active role actually commenced when he was ordered to guard Andrew Maake and Jackson and Makupe.
He was not involved on the following day with the interrogation of Makupe and Maake, because he was instructed to return to his home. Upon his return he once again assumed the role of a guard and a manager so to speak, who had to take Makupe to a telephone. That particular evening after the abduction of Sefolo had taken place, he once again assumed the role of a guard. It is understandable that his evidence regarding the order given by Hechter not to discuss anything with these detainees, is reasonable given the circumstances in the light of his specific obligations.
With regard to the electric death of these three persons, it is his evidence that he reconciled himself with this. I do not wish to repeat unnecessarily what the general conditions in the country were at that stage along with the subjective factors within the state of mind of Mr Bokaba, he mentioned for example, that the country was steeped in a situation of warfare. Without elaborating unnecessarily about this, if we take these facts into consideration, he reconciled himself with this. He also reconciled himself with the fact that these three bodies were to be exploded by means of a landmine.
His reconciliation with van Vuuren's evidence can only be viewed on the basis that if it was the intention of van Vuuren and the others to destroy the entire cell, because he himself didn't have any knowledge specifically pertaining to the activities of Maake, Makupe and Sefolo, it is understandable then in the sense that he was merely obeying orders given by a senior officer at that stage. He was not involved with the death by electrocution itself, according to his evidence and the facts presented in the bundle. His subjective opinion that evidence was destroyed is also reasonable considering the circumstances, explaining why he reconciles himself the death of these three persons and then also the desecration of the bodies.
Therefore I request with respect, that he be granted amnesty, not as a result of the decision pertaining to Cronje, but similarly - I beg your pardon, not the decision pertaining to Cronje but the decision pertaining to Hechter's application, as we can find on page 196 in the bundle, because despite the fact that he was not directly involved in the murder or the assault, he reconciled himself with these actions, given the circumstances. Therefore I submit with respect, that he be granted amnesty for those specific offences. As it pleases you.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Roux.
MR VAN DEN BERG IN ARGUMENT: Thank you, Mr Chairperson. I don't have a great deal on which to address you. The presence of the two wives and the mother today is really in a continued quest to put finality to this episode or this chapter in their lives.
It is, I am sure you are fully aware Mr Chairperson, inherent in their culture and of absolute necessity to them to find the bodies. They've heard the story, they've heard the story through Mr Hechter and through Mr van Vuuren, they know what happened to their loved ones, but they are unable to put finality until such time as they are able to locate the bodies. Their presence today was in pursuit of that aspect.
They accept that Mr Bokaba was a Security Policeman and that he acted within the context which he did. The answers which he has given today have facilitated the process of getting greater clarity in respect of the deceased' bodies. That whole aspect I think, commenced during the short adjournment when there were discussions between the family and Mr Bokaba, and I would implore Mr Bokaba to see that process through and to make himself available to the members of the families and to facilitate them in coming to terms with what has transpired.
Mr Chairperson, I don't have any formal submissions in terms of the criteria set out in the Act, it's clear that the application fulfils the formal requirements in terms of being on the prescribed form etcetera, etcetera, and there is no basis on which I can submit to you that he does not fulfil the requirements, the substantive requirements as set out by the Act. I can't really take it any further than that, Mr Chairperson. As it pleases you.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr van den Berg. What I would narrow it down to is that there's no opposition that amnesty should be granted?
MR VAN DEN BERG: As I understand my instructions they wanted to close this chapter in their lives, they're unable to do so until such time as they have at least located the bodies. We're one step closer to that with what we've heard, what the families have heard from Mamasela and to a certain extent confirmed by Mr Bokaba. There are other aspects which we will follow up in due course, but ja, I can't take it further than that.
CHAIRPERSON: I'm indebted to you, Mr van den Berg. Mr Roux, obviously you don't have any reply to what Mr van den Berg has said.
MR ROUX: No, Chairperson, none.
CHAIRPERSON: This brings us to the conclusion of the application of Mr Bokaba. We reserve the decision in that respect, it would however be delivered in writing shortly, and when I say shortly, not beyond April, because other than what was said here we are duty-bound to deliberate on it and not merely to say others have been granted amnesty, therefore it follows, it is not that kind of process, we've got to weigh the evidence presented to us to be able to come to a decision. However, I wish to thank the legal representatives for their assistance, this was really ably done, this is very much appreciated.
To you, Mr Bokaba, thank you for having had the courage to appear before us, we assume the audience is largely an extract of the Mamelodi community, that you had the courage to do that for the furtherance of reconciliation. We are indebted to you.
MR BOKABA: I thank you, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: To the families of Maake, Makupe, Sefolo, as your legal representative ably put it, that your further attendance today is a continued quest to know precisely what happened to the remains of your beloved ones. I'm conscious that this is not less than five times that you have appeared and this question being investigated. I'm encouraged, and I speak this on behalf of my colleagues who are seated next to me, that you find courage because when you speak of your culture you are not speaking of a culture different from mine. I know that the matter would not go to rest until we have performed rituals which are in accordance with our culture. But the courage you have shown in this process is tremendous and if we would have all people coming before us showing the courage you have, we shall definitely reconcile in this country.
I thank you for coming, but I am still saying personally, when you appeared before me I could not do more than satisfy the culture in that you would go out today and perform those rituals. I say because Mr Bokaba, as I am informed, is prepared to interact with you further, I hope and I shall keep you in my prayers, that you find those bodies or at least the remains of the bodies of your loved ones. I think you very much.
This concludes the incident of Maake, Makupe and Sefolo. We shall reconvene and complete the matter that stood down. Thank you very much.
Mr Roux, I don't see your colleagues. Is there somebody who is advising them that they may? We will proceed with the matter which stood down earlier to accommodate the Bokaba application.
