CHAIRPERSON: The applicant is still under oath to tell the truth. Does he understand that?
LANGANANI FOSTER MUNYAI: (s.u.o.)
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR VAN RENSBURG
Mr Munyai, can you start off by telling us what is your date of birth please?
MR MUNYAI: I was born on the 25th February 1965.
MR VAN RENSBURG: If I can refer you to paragraph 5 of the first page of your application it is stated there that your date of birth is the 21st February 1972?
MR MUNYAI: Those are the years I've used while I was arrested. During those days I used those years so that they must make my sentence to be a little bit low.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Are you saying that you lied on this application form?
MR MUNYAI: Yes I did, I did lie.
MR VAN RENSBURG: And now except for paragraph 5 where else on this application form have you lied?
MR MUNYAI: There's no other place where I have lied.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Are you sure about that?
MR MUNYAI: Yes I'm sure about that.
CHAIRPERSON: So you decided to tell the truth in the other places?
MR MUNYAI: Yes I've decided to tell the truth in other places.
CHAIRPERSON: Why did you think you needed to lie in the one paragraph?
MR MUNYAI: It's the years I used while I was arrested.
CHAIRPERSON: We're quite aware of that, I'm asking you why?
MR MUNYAI: It's because during those days when a person was still under the police in the past if you give low years which are not many then if they think that you're still a youth then I think if they will think you are young then they will give you a light sentence.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes that's very clever but in the court did you tell the court that you killed these people or you participated in the killing?
MR MUNYAI: Yes I did agree that I've killed.
CHAIRPERSON: So you pleaded guilty in the trial?
MR MUNYAI: No I didn't find myself guilty.
CHAIRPERSON: In the court did you tell them that you were guilty, that you did kill these people?
MR MUNYAI: In court I agreed that I participated in the killing but when I was asked whether I'm guilty or not I said no, I'm not guilty.
CHAIRPERSON: So even in the court the age is the only thing you lied about?
MR MUNYAI: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mr van Rensburg?
MR VAN RENSBURG: Thank you Chairperson.
The reason why what you have supplied for giving your age or your date of birth as 1972 you said that you used that date because you wanted to get a lighter sentence. Okay but surely you agree then that that argument and the reason for lying and using that date is not relevant for the purposes of the application for amnesty, don't you agree?
MR MUNYAI: Yes.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Okay now tell us why did you lie in the application for amnesty?
MR MUNYAI: In the application I don't think I lied but the people who assisted us in filling the forms when we sent them to Cape Town were using years which were appearing in the requisition which is the one which is in the application.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Are you now saying that you didn't see that they used the wrong date and that the date was just copied from another document?
MR MUNYAI: When the forms were sent to Cape Town they were not in our possession, they were in the hands of my representative who maybe it didn't come to his or her mind to question me about it.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Is it not your signature on the end of that document on the third page?
MR MUNYAI: Yes it's my signature.
MR VAN RENSBURG: So Mr Munyai, when you were consulted in respect of this application did you put all your trust in your representatives to properly make the application?
MR MUNYAI: Yes I put all my trust in my representative.
CHAIRPERSON: Can you speak or read English?
MR MUNYAI: I can read.
CHAIRPERSON: How well?
MR MUNYAI: Sometimes I can but sometimes I cannot even hear what's being said.
CHAIRPERSON: When you signed this document did you read through the document before you signed it?
MR MUNYAI: Yes I did.
CHAIRPERSON: And you were aware when you signed it that the wrong date of birth was in it?
MR MUNYAI: In terms of the year to tell the truth I didn't take that into consideration while I was reading it through because it was done in a hurry.
CHAIRPERSON: Now that's what I'm asking you did you read through the document properly before you signed it?
MR MUNYAI: I did proof read but maybe I didn't understand the English well.
CHAIRPERSON: No, I'm talking about whether you understood it well or whether you briefly read through it, were you aware that your application form is going in with the wrong date of birth?
MR MUNYAI: I didn't take that into consideration, I didn't identify that.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Thank you Chairperson.
You see Mr Munyai, the problem that we're now sitting with is that you are here today in order to confirm also what you have said in this application form. Now what I want to know from you and you've got to confirm that, are the rest of the information on this application form correct or not and do you know what is in that form or not?
CHAIRPERSON: Mr van Rensburg, I think we'd better define what the application form is. How far are you referring to. Did you include the annexures or only the roneoed form?
MR VAN RENSBURG: Yes I will at this stage also include the annexures as well. Can I put that to him? Thank you Chairperson.
Yes in this regard I want you to look at the application form through pages 1, 2 and 3 and also the annexures annexed thereto, pages 4, 5 and 6 and I want you to confirm that you know what is in those forms and annexures and that it is the truth?
CHAIRPERSON: Can you tell me something, was this part of the document not drawn to your client's attention?
MR NDOU: Thank you Chairperson. In fact what transpired was apparently a Committee was formed which did the applications and sent some of the documents through with this attachment. When one goes through all the applications one finds this similar document in them but now in general when you speak to them they do confirm some of the contents. Now the only problem that I have is to whether pertaining to specific incidents and pertaining to specific points, some people do agree with what's written in the document, some are not aware of the contents but in general, that the document was put in almost each and every application.
CHAIRPERSON: I accept that but during your consultations?
MR NDOU: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: I'm not asking for what answers he may have given you.
MR NDOU: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Was this not part of the documentation that you dealt with when you consulted with him?
MR NDOU: Yes I think what he's trying to go through the document to check with what he agrees with and what he doesn't agree with.
CHAIRPERSON: No, but at that time when you consulted with him was he not in a position to do so?
MR NDOU: Yes, he had the document.
CHAIRPERSON: Then I can't understand why he's having to do that now?
MR NDOU: No, I think he's through with it now.
CHAIRPERSON: Because it takes up time. We've got to sit here until he's completed it.
MR NDOU: Yes maybe the problem stems from the fact that - I suggest that my learned friend just puts specific questions because it's very, very difficult if I say do you agree with the whole document, it will be very, very difficult to say I agree with the document unless I'm shown this specific point.
CHAIRPERSON: That was not his question, his question was or the effect of the question was do you know that part of the document then he reads through it in order to be able to say yes or no.
MR NDOU: What I understood the question to mean was whether he agrees, is there any other thing that he doesn't agree with in the document and I thought at that stage it will be very dangerous for him just to say yes or no unless he ...(indistinct)
CHAIRPERSON: Look, I can appreciate that. All I'm concerned about is of the import of the question was does he know that document and then he decides to read it to find out if he knows the document. Let's proceed because I'm not very happy that people come sit and read documents that they should be reading long before they come here.
MR NDOU: Maybe the problem is he didn't understand the question because I also didn't understand the way you're putting it to me now.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Thank you. Okay now the answer or the question was do you know the contents of that document plus the annexures?
MR MUNYAI: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Was that bit of the document, that annexures intended by you to be part of the application?
MR MUNYAI: All those things which are in this document, this is what is exactly the truth.
CHAIRPERSON: No, I'm not asking whether it's the truth, listen to the question. When you made your application did you intend the annexures to be part of your application?
MR MUNYAI: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mr van Rensburg?
MR VAN RENSBURG: And you there with that answer you agree with the contents of these documents because it has been included, is that correct?
MR MUNYAI: Could you please repeat your question?
MR VAN RENSBURG: You agree with the contents of this document because you consented it to be included in your application?
MR MUNYAI: I didn't hear your question properly, could you please repeat?
CHAIRPERSON: By the very fact that you agreed that document, your application must be supplemented by the annexures. The question is that you wanted the contents thereof to be part of the application?
MR MUNYAI: Yes I agree.
CHAIRPERSON: Now I'm going to be quite fair to you and I want you to think very carefully on the question. Think about it, don't answer as a matter of convenience. All the facts as contained in those annexures, 1 and 2, do you agree with everything or only part of it or what is the position. Do you want both to be part of your application or sections of it?
MR MUNYAI: All the sections in annexure A and B, I want them to be part of my application, all of them.
CHAIRPERSON: ...(inaudible) section?
MR MUNYAI: Yes.
ADV SIGODI: When was the first time that you saw these annexures?
MR MUNYAI: If I can remember well I think I've seen them for the first time in 1997.
ADV SIGODI: So when your application was sent to Cape Town had you already seen these annexures?
MR MUNYAI: When my application was sent to Cape Town by then I have not seen them, but I have seen them when my application was already gone to Cape Town or sent to Cape Town.
ADV SIGODI: Who gave you these annexures.
MR MUNYAI: A certain representative of us who is working with, there is a certain gentleman in a committee we formed who is working with our representative and I think his name is Abraham who is working with Mr Ndou will see to it that our things will go in order.
ADV SIGODI: Okay.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Thank you Mr Chairperson.
Now when you consulted with your legal representative, did you bring to his attention the fact that the date of birth is incorrect on the form?
MR MUNYAI: Yes I did explain to him.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Okay. Can you just tell this hearing what offences have you been convicted of?
MR MUNYAI: It's murder and arson and assault.
MR VAN RENSBURG: How many counts of murder?
MR MUNYAI: Three counts.
CHAIRPERSON: For what do you make amnesty application?
MR MUNYAI: I'm making amnesty application in all those counts seeing that all these counts in which I was found guilty had happened on the same day.
CHAIRPERSON: Now in respect of whom do you make the murder applications, who are the victims there?
MR MUNYAI: It's Maphaha and Madadzhe.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Yes and the third one? Who is the third person you have been convicted of murdering?
MR MUNYAI: There's no other third person that we were alleged to have killed.
MR VAN RENSBURG: You've just testified that you've been convicted of three counts of murder, who is the other person?
CHAIRPERSON: I think what he intended is to say three offences, two murders, one assault, one arson. Did I understand that correctly?
MR MUNYAI: Yes.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Thank you Mr Chairperson.
ADV DE JAGER: Because it's two counts of murder, arson and assault, it's four?
MR MUNYAI: Yes, it's four.
CHAIRPERSON: The assault, GBH, on whom was that?
MR MUNYAI: Assault, GBH, occurred Chinak Simete, if I'm giving the right surname, I'm not sure of the surname.
CHAIRPERSON: What do you say the surname was?
MR MUNYAI: Simete.
CHAIRPERSON: And the arson?
MR MUNYAI: We burnt the house of Mr Mbatha.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Thank you Mr Chairperson.
Now what was your sentence for each of these four counts that you've been convicted of?
MR MUNYAI: In these counts I was sentenced to 46 years. The difference is that all counts would run concurrently so if they're running concurrently it was decided that I will be in jail for 20 effective years of which three years was suspended and so it remained being 17.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Yes, what I want to find out is for each of the offences what was your sentence, each separate.
CHAIRPERSON: Well at best it must be 20 years or less.
MR MUNYAI: Count one, I was sentenced for 20 years. Count 2, I was sentenced for 20 years, count 3 it was 5 years, count 4 it was 12 months.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Okay and tell us about the assault on this Mrs Simete. When did this happen?
MR MUNYAI: It happened on the very same day on which all these counts were happened, that was on the 2nd February 1990.
MR VAN RENSBURG: And how did you assault her?
MR MUNYAI: The only lady Chineko Simete is the person who was being interrogated before being assaulted. She was asked to name the people you used to commit those crimes with and it was seen that she was not prepared to talk and then we decided to use our bare hands and then I used to lashes and today two people who were there who was using sticks in their possession.
CHAIRPERSON: What was she doing with other people?
MR MUNYAI: Could you please repeat your question?
CHAIRPERSON: What was she doing that you were wanting to know she was doing with other people?
MR MUNYAI: I think yesterday I explained that while we were in the meeting people were naming other people, I was writing the list, she was falling under the people who were in the list of witches.
CHAIRPERSON: So you wanted to find out from her who the witches were with that she was working?
MR MUNYAI: Yes on that day we were intending to find out from her other people with whom she used to work in witchcraft.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Were you trying to extract from her information about other witches, also to add them onto the list?
MR MUNYAI: Yes.
MR VAN RENSBURG: And did she give you those names?
MR MUNYAI: Yes she gave us those names.
MR VAN RENSBURG: How many people were added onto the list because of this interrogation on the old lady?
MR MUNYAI: Two names.
MR VAN RENSBURG: What two names?
MR MUNYAI: They gave us Kambani, I don't know the first name and again Makawu's name.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Was Makawu's name already on the list at that stage?
MR MUNYAI: It's the second Makawu, we have the first Makawu who is on the list and this second Makawu was mentioned later by the lady in question.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Now at what stage did you assault this old lady with open hands, was that before the murders took place, between the two murders or after the murders?
MR MUNYAI: The beating of this lady happened before we killed anybody. We were on our way to commit the murder.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Was this old lady's name on the list?
MR MUNYAI: Yes it was on the list.
CHAIRPERSON: Why didn't you kill her?
MR MUNYAI: It's because that lady explained that she doesn't kill in the witchcraft which she commits. She knows Kambani and Makawu whose witchcraft is intended to kill.
CHAIRPERSON: So you were only after witches who committed ritual murders?
INTERPRETER: He doesn't understand the question because ritual murder and witchcraft murder is two different things.
CHAIRPERSON: Who performed witchcraft involving the killing of people?
MR MUNYAI: The people we were intending to kill, it's people who used to give people for example Sangomas who used to give people medicine to kill and the people who practice witchcraft of killing people. It's true we were looking after these people because there were stumbling blocks in reaching our objective.
CHAIRPERSON: Now what about witches who did not perform that were they exempted from being dealt with?
MR MUNYAI: So there was no witch who was exempted. On that day Chinako Simete was her luck that she was not killed after making the statement of giving us those two people.
CHAIRPERSON: Well this doesn't make sense to me because I asked you just now why she wasn't killed. You had her in your custody to the extent that she was assaulted. I asked you why then if she was on the list why she wasn't then killed and your answer was to the effect that she explained that, her activities in witchcraft, it did not involve killing people and therefore she was not killed. Do you remember saying so?
MR MUNYAI: Yes I remember.
CHAIRPERSON: So am I correct then by saying it follows that only people who were involved with witchcraft related to killing people that were the targets of your attack and that they were intended to be killed. Am I correct in understanding you?
MR MUNYAI: Yes I understand.
CHAIRPERSON: Is that the correct position, I'm asking.
MR MUNYAI: Yes.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Thank you Mr Chairperson.
Can you remember yesterday you testified that you decided to kill the witches because you wanted to make Venda ungovernable, can you remember that?
MR MUNYAI: Yes I still remember.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Now this lady, the old lady was as a witch put on the list so won't you say that that would have furthered your cause to make Venda ungovernable to kill this old lady, wouldn't that have furthered your cause?
MR MUNYAI: It would have furthered our cause but on that day I have indicated that I beat her using my bare hands and others assaulted her by sticks and she fell down and the people thought she was dead. Unfortunately she was not dead that is why I've indicated that it was lucky that she didn't die on that day.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Are you now saying that you actually intended to kill her, actually thought that you have killed her but she wasn't killed, is that what you're now saying?
MR MUNYAI: Yes when we left her room, it's only after she gave us the incident of witches who were participating the same thing together and then we thought she was dead when we left.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Why didn't you burn her place, her hut?
MR MUNYAI: It's because we realised that the person we were after was already attacked.
CHAIRPERSON: What did you do to her that you thought she was dead?
MR MUNYAI: After falling down I decided to shake her and I realised that she was not speaking.
CHAIRPERSON: Was she stabbed, hacked, poisoned or what?
MR MUNYAI: She was oozing or bleeding because she was being beaten by sticks but she was not stabbed.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes carry on?
MR VAN RENSBURG: Can you remember that yesterday the Chairperson explained to you that in order to qualify for amnesty you've got to make full disclosure of the facts, can you remember that?
MR MUNYAI: Yes I still remember that.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Okay now the question is why didn't you tell us this story about attempting to kill the old lady yesterday?
MR MUNYAI: Yesterday as I was trying to explain or where this thing started and the Chairperson asked me to ask people who didn't make - I mustn't talk about the people who didn't apply for amnesty and then he advised me to give my evidence on two cases Maphaha and Madadzhe.
MR VAN RENSBURG: But you are making application for assault on this old lady as well, aren't you?
MR MUNYAI: I'm also doing that, that is why I'm trying to explain that yesterday where we have travelled that day.
CHAIRPERSON: You see, I want to point out something to you. I don't know if it helps you to answer the question. When I told you to leave out incidents for which amnesty is not being applied for, you were already on the murders. The first murder was Madadzhe, you'd already described that, then I told you just keep all the other incidents in between and go straight to the other matter that you're applying for, do you remember?
MR MUNYAI: Yes I still remember.
CHAIRPERSON: Now you say this lady was assaulted before any murder?
MR MUNYAI: Yes that is correct.
CHAIRPERSON: So the time you were supposed to have spoken about this lady, I had not yet asked you to get to the crimes for which you apply for amnesty, do you understand?
MR MUNYAI: Yes I understand.
CHAIRPERSON: Now that's why the attorney is asking you the question that why didn't you explain all this yesterday. You on your own went straight to the meeting, you went straight to Madadzhe. Whether that is true or not, I mean you went in your evidence, you went straight there. I'm not saying that's what actually happened.
MR MUNYAI: That is not true, what I've said yesterday is that after the meeting we went to Makawu, that's where I've started, it's then that when I was giving my evidence there and then the Chairperson advised me to concentrate on two cases for which I'm applying for amnesty. That's why I've started to talk about Madadzhe and Maphaha after being warned by the Chairperson that we are only talking about the cases in which I have applied for amnesty and we're not talking about the cases for which I didn't apply for amnesty.
CHAIRPERSON: Then why didn't you include this one about the lady if you're applying for it?
MR MUNYAI: Yesterday I would have talked about her if I was given a chance to do so. If I was given a chance to explain that from Mamakawu, we went to which place and which place, I would have reached that item.
CHAIRPERSON: You see, I want to point out to you yesterday also when you were asked what you were applying for you said two murders and arson, that's what your evidence was. Do you recall that?
MR MUNYAI: Yes I still remember that.
CHAIRPERSON: So you didn't even tell us you were applying for assault?
MR MUNYAI: Maybe all that or as I was trying to give the whole story, when the Chairperson interjects ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: You had not yet got onto your story, we asked you first what are you applying for. It's very near the beginning of your evidence.
MR MUNYAI: I'm should have, maybe I have forgotten to mention it, if I didn't mention it yesterday.
CHAIRPERSON: Well I'm sure if you didn't mention it, I'm telling you that you didn't mention it, you said it was a mistake?
MR MUNYAI: Yes I agree it's a mistake.
CHAIRPERSON: I don't want to know the details of what you told your attorney but did you tell your attorney about it, the assault?
MR MUNYAI: I didn't understand that question?
CHAIRPERSON: When you consulted with your attorney, did you tell him you're applying for assault of Mrs Simete?
MR MUNYAI: I didn't tell him because I was not having the idea thereof, I thought because I'm applying for amnesty because all these four counts where I was sentenced on the same day and they were all grouped together, I thought in the application I'm applying for all those counts, that is why maybe I didn't inform my attorney about that because I thought everything was - all charges were included.
CHAIRPERSON: And that explains why he never raised it.
Anyway, carry on.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Thank you Mr Chairperson.
Now I put it to you that the reason why you failed to mention this assault GBH count to your attorney was the same reason why you put the wrong birth date on the form and that is to make your liability smaller than it actually is?
MR MUNYAI: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Do you agree with that?
MR MUNYAI: So maybe if he can repeat? Sometimes I tend to be confused when I'm being questioned.
CHAIRPERSON: What are you confused about?
MR MUNYAI: More especially because this case I'm applying this amnesty happened long ago so when I'm being questioned sometimes I get confused although sometimes some of the things I have forgotten.
CHAIRPERSON: Look here, I want to tell you something in your own interest.
MR MUNYAI: Could you please repeat your question?
CHAIRPERSON: I want to tell you something in your own interest, that you're not sitting in a court of law now. We are not going to sentence you, do you understand. I explained to you yesterday that one of the requirements necessary for the granting of amnesty is for you to make a full disclosure in respect of the crimes you committed for which you make application for amnesty, do you understand that?
MR MUNYAI: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: You're not confused about that?
MR MUNYAI: No with what you have just explained, I'm not confused about that.
CHAIRPERSON: And if we are going to find that you did not make full disclosure or that we can't believe you, then we are going to refuse amnesty, do you understand?
MR MUNYAI: Yes I understand.
CHAIRPERSON: So let's cut out all this nonsense about forgetting and being confused and why didn't tell your attorney certain things etc. Let's not blame him, do you understand? If there are acceptable reasons why you didn't tell him then tell us. Well let's not beat about the bush because many other people who are in jail. We are going to try to complete most of those cases so that they can get out of jail because we haven't got time to beat about the bush about being confused etc, etc, we're busy with important things here. There are thousands of people still in jail who could possibly get out, do you understand? And it's in your own interest to make full disclosure. Now let's get on with it.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Thank you Mr Chairperson, I will move onto another aspect. Okay, let's talk about the meeting that you had. I presume that meeting was held on the same date than the murders were committed, is that correct?
MR MUNYAI: Yes it's correct.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Okay, now at that meeting you decided that because you can't enter into rent boycotts and things like that and therefore you decided to attack people who participate to work with the government, is that correct?
MR MUNYAI: Yes.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Okay, now what I want to know is, if you now want to hurt or injure people that participate to work with the government and to further the causes of the government, why didn't you for instance attack a police station?
MR MUNYAI: It's because it was difficult for us to go and attack a police station because the police were always armed during those days and we were armless.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Okay, so why didn't you attack the local magistrate's office?
MR MUNYAI: It's because even there in court police are always there with guns so we thought they would see us and then throw teargas on us or shoot at us.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Okay, so why didn't you attack a local school because there are also government employees at that school?
MR MUNYAI: It's because teachers who were teaching in those schools were not part of the people, we thought they assist the rulers of those days for an example the going out of the rulers to the Sangomas to get medicine so that they can have more powers and be respected at work and that they ensure that their government is not disturbed, it means that it was not possible for us to go and attack mistresses and the teachers because they were not falling under that category. The people who we were intending to attack were people who were giving rulers medicines which makes those high officers to protect themselves and to protect the government by those medicines because it was ruling, using medicines or muti.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Did you believe that, did you believe it is so that the government members used witches and witchcraft to protect their own power and to strengthen themselves. Did you believe that?
MR MUNYAI: Yes I believe.
CHAIRPERSON: Then why didn't you say so, why didn't you testify that. Whole of yesterday or whatever period you were sitting here yesterday and some of this morning your attorney was asking you, I asked you, the panel has asked you, why didn't you confirm it then?
MR MUNYAI: Maybe it's because I was not understanding the question properly.
CHAIRPERSON: How did you understand the question now? Same question?
MR MUNYAI: I think I understand it now.
CHAIRPERSON: Maybe Mr van Rensburg you have more powers than I have.
MR VAN RENSBURG: I doubt that Mr Chairperson, but I'll try.
I want to ask you an easy question. If you now did believe that a member of the government could go to a witch and get some muti there in order to strengthen him or protect his position and if you believed that really worked, why didn't you and your group go to a witch and get some muti to protect you against that power?
MR MUNYAI: It was difficult for me because I was not prepared, but those days I was not thinking of promoting witchcraft that is why I didn't just think of going to the witchcraft to help me in that day but then I never believed that the witchcraft can assist me in that way, that is why I didn't go there.
CHAIRPERSON: So what made you believe they're assisting the politicians?
MR MUNYAI: It's because high members of government which was ruling here in Venda were able or I think what I believe is that they used to go to the witches and the witches informed them that if they want to have high position or to be rich or for their government to remain intact, they must go and kill a person and attack the parts of the person and bring them to me and I will make them with muti then your things will be in order, that makes us to believe that high officials and the government of the day were working hand in hand with witchcraft and Sangomas.
CHAIRPERSON: I'm going to ask you the question again. Do you believe that witches have these powers that they say they have?
MR MUNYAI: Yes in Venda or in Venda culture we agree.
CHAIRPERSON: I'm talking about you.
MR MUNYAI: Yes I agree, I believe.
CHAIRPERSON: Why didn't you go to a witch then and say "look here, I will pay you like these people pay you, give me something to make me overthrow the government because that is my aim"?
MR MUNYAI: As far as I'm concerned, during those days I was not in need of powers which I could find by using muti. What we were trying to do is that people with fight powers shall not continue to exercise such powers. It's not that I was aiming to get those powers.
CHAIRPERSON: Tell me, I'm going to ask a straight question, those actions that day, were those directed at eradicating witchcraft for witchcraft reasons in the area or were they directed at eradicating or reducing the power of witchcraft because they assisted the politicians?
MR MUNYAI: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes what?
MR MUNYAI: I'm agreeing that what happened that day was directed to making sure that witchcraft is no longer practised because it was stopping us in overpowering the government of Venda which by then we thought it was being protected by muti which they used to receive from the Sangomas.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Okay, so part of the problem that you had at the time is that you found that some activists were mysteriously dying, can you remember testifying that?
MR MUNYAI: Yes I did mention that is true.
MR VAN RENSBURG: And the impression that you had and also the other people had was these activists were actually killed by the witches in order to further the aims of the politicians, is that correct?
MR MUNYAI: To put it clearly I can say that people who were in the Venda government, high officials, the rulers were using witches and Sangomas to destroy the activists who were present to ensure that or because they know that if they send Sangomas or witches because they were working hand in hand to destroy the activists it means that they were going to be weak people to oppose the government so it means that a person who was in power was going to be affected in no way in the death of the activists so it was our - we were obliged to follow the witches instead of the rulers.
ADV DE JAGER: Okay, could you tell me the name of the activist that's been killed?
MR MUNYAI: I know two of them.
ADV DE JAGER: Yes, give me the names?
MR MUNYAI: The first one is Pandele Ramaru.
ADV DE JAGER: How old?
MR MUNYAI: By then he was 21 years old.
ADV DE JAGER: The other one?
MR MUNYAI: The other one is called Tihuri weInzene.
ADV DE JAGER: How old?
MR MUNYAI: Plus minus 25 years.
ADV SIGODI: Sorry and how did these activists die, how were they killed?
MR MUNYAI: The other one was struck by lightning when they were from school.
ADV SIGODI: Yes?
MR MUNYAI: And the other one was a person that day he just fell down and then he died and he was not sick.
ADV SIGODI: And what role were they playing politically, these two people, what was their role?
MR MUNYAI: These guys most of the time they were recruiting people and to show people the policies of the ANC and the PAC, to show the people that we have this kind of organisations which are permitting us these kind of things so to a certain extent if we support them they will help us while they will be in power.
ADV SIGODI: You say the policy of both the ANC and the PAC?
MR MUNYAI: Yes, the other one was a supporter of the ANC and the other one was a supporter of the PAC, that is why they were guiding us on those two different organisations.
CHAIRPERSON: Did the PAC and the ANC work together?
MR MUNYAI: Those days or during that time, I don't know that they were co-operating but simply because we were all under the apartheid government, people tended to believe that PAC and ANC co-operated or worked together because those two organisations were banned and their leaders were in exile.
CHAIRPERSON: And then both parties recruiting offices in the area died?
MR MUNYAI: Those people were supporters, they were not card carrying members, in other words it means they were trying to unite ...(indistinct) for us, the Blacks, so that we can understand the direction of the politics of the country.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Thank you Mr Chairperson.
Now except for these two activists that you have mentioned, are you aware of any other activists that were killed or went missing?
MR MUNYAI: I only remember of a certain child whom we just thought on our own that this child when she grows she will be an activist is the one who was missed and I've forgotten her name or his name because the incident happened quite long ago.
MR VAN RENSBURG: What was the age of that child?
MR MUNYAI: Yesterday I mentioned that she was 12 to 13 years.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Are you saying that she wasn't an activist yet but she was about to become an activist?
MR MUNYAI: Yes, this child that is on our own perception. We used to call her or him the activist because she used to show that in the meetings she used to participate and she was interested in asking questions here and there.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Let me ask you this, don't you think the government would have rather benefited from killing you rather than a thirteen year old child?
MR MUNYAI: Yes I think the government would have benefited.
MR VAN RENSBURG: So can you then explain how the cause of the government was furthered by killing this thirteen year old child?
MR MUNYAI: In that child we can't say that the government participated. The government only participated in ensuring that the true activists mentioned above must be killed but with this child it was a jealousy by the witches, that is why they led her or him into getting missed and including with the case of this child it makes the situation to be worse.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Now can you just explain that, I don't understand how it was the jealousy of the witches that killed the child?
MR MUNYAI: In the case of this child considering his or her age because he was twelve or thirteen years it means that we thought she was under age and she was not having that clear ideas that she can be an activist to such an extent. It means the part played in her being killed I think it was the jealousy by witches because she was intelligent.
ADV DE JAGER: So that had nothing to do with the politics of the day and the government being kept in power?
MR MUNYAI: It participated after the missing of this child. Many things we would try to just not do anything about it, sometimes we just kept quiet sometimes we tried to talk to the government and the government refused but in our village the missing of this child made things to be worse and we vowed to make sure that this government must be ungovernable.
ADV DE JAGER: But isn't it still happening today that children disappear?
MR MUNYAI: Yes but it might be happening but not to extent of what was happening in the past.
ADV DE JAGER: So it had nothing to do with politics?
MR MUNYAI: I didn't understand that, could you please repeat your question?
ADV DE JAGER: It's still things that's been happening up to this present day and it happened long in the past, it had nothing to do with politics?
MR MUNYAI: Now it might not link with politics but in the past it was identical with politics which was happening here in Venda.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Thank you Mr Chairperson.
This child, this thirteen year old child that vanished, you testified that that child was last seen in the company of Mr Maphaha, is that correct?
MR MUNYAI: Yes that is correct.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Okay, now at the time when you decided to kill Mr Maphaha because the child was last seen with him, you knew that Mr Maphaha's reason for killing the child was because he was jealous of that child, is that not so?
MR MUNYAI: When we went to Mr Maphaha we would not have killed him if he handed over the child because on that day he failed to hand over the child who was last seen with him resulted into him being killed.
CHAIRPERSON: Subsequently, was that child found?
MR MUNYAI: From there I didn't know whether she was found because I was immediately arrested because of this cases I'm now applying for amnesty.
CHAIRPERSON: It's about ten years ago, have you heard whether she was found or not?
MR MUNYAI: Up to now to tell you the honest truth I have not received that information because they're in jail, there are not many people who used to come and visit me.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Thank you Mr Chairperson.
You constantly are saying that you wanted and planned to make Venda ungovernable or the area ungovernable. Why did you want to make the area ungovernable?
MR MUNYAI: It's because the Venda citizens, not ...(indistinct) citizens only, all Venda citizens were intending to make the government to fall or be incorporated into South Africa because we were tired of it.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Okay, so that was the main goal, you wanted Venda to be incorporated back into South Africa. Was that the main goal?
MR MUNYAI: Yes that was our main goal.
CHAIRPERSON: Let me ask you something. Under the Nationalist apartheid government that would not happen, do you know that?
MR MUNYAI: You mean what will not happen?
CHAIRPERSON: Under the old government, reincorporation would not occur, do you know that?
MR MUNYAI: Yes it will not happen, that is why people were striking and trying to do all things to make the government ungovernable, to make it be incorporated although it would be difficult.
CHAIRPERSON: That's why I'm asking you now, this question, which government are you talking about. One small government in Venda or are talking about the real corporate government of South Africa?
MR MUNYAI: Could you please repeat your question?
CHAIRPERSON: When you say you wanted to make the government, country ungovernable and see to the demise of the government, are you referring to the small government of Venda or were you referring to the real controllers of the country, the Nationalist government?
MR MUNYAI: I'm talking in terms of the small government of Venda.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Okay, let's turn to the murder of Mr Madadzhe on that 2nd February. What was this person's position in the community?
MR MUNYAI: She was a headman or Ingoma.
CHAIRPERSON: Was she a female?
MR MUNYAI: He was a male.
CHAIRPERSON: It was interpreted as she.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Thank you Mr Chairperson.
You see that is exactly my problem, is it not so that the head person at that stage was in fact a female by the name of Tina Vuyo Madadzhe, namely the deceased's wife?
MR MUNYAI: What you are saying I don't understand it, would you please repeat your question?
MR VAN RENSBURG: What I'm saying is that the person that you killed was not in fact the headman, his wife was in charge, the person with the ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: You know Mr van Rensburg, I often wondered to myself how these tribal communities handled the gender issue of the constitution because we've on many occasions been told that never ever will a woman be a headman, only men can do that. My colleague refers to that as headperson, I'm not too sure if she's right?
MR VAN RENSBURG: Thank you Mr Chairperson. I don't think I'll continue with this line, I just wanted his reaction on that.
You testified that at a meeting a person pointed his finger at you and said that as long as that person is in charge the government will not fall, can you remember that?
MR MUNYAI: Yes I still remember but that was not on the 2nd February. I indicated even yesterday that it happened before the 2nd February.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Yes I appreciate that, I know that it was before the date of the murder. What I want to know from you, who is that person who pointed the finger at you and promised that as long as he is in power the government will not fall?
MR MUNYAI: It's a certain chief who was called Norman Chicororo who on that day he was troubled with the old man, Mr Madadzhe and Madadzhe, both of them, they pointed at me with their fingers.
MR VAN RENSBURG: So you were actually ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: What's the problem with pointing to somebody with a finger?
MR MUNYAI: There is a problem in the Black culture because a person can point me and say you will say it and if I look down upon that sometimes I can find myself in trouble or the following day I died. Then when he pointed me with a finger the people next to me said you must take cognisance of that thing, that person has pointed you by a finger and you mustn't look above that thing seeing that there are people dying mysteriously. It's possible that you can also die unfailing.
CHAIRPERSON: I'm happy one previous state president was not in Africa because he used to point fingers.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Thank you Mr Chairperson.
When you testified in your evidence in chief you mentioned a person uttering these words. Let's not now worry about the pointing of the finger, let's worry about the uttering of the words. The person who said this government will not fall as long as he is the chief, that person when you testified that you were referring to Chief Chicororo, is that correct?
MR MUNYAI: Yes that is correct.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Okay now and yesterday you only testified that it was that same person, Chicororo, who pointed the finger at you, is that correct?
MR MUNYAI: Yes, yesterday I indicated that Madadzhe pointed me by a finger in the car of Mr Chicororo. Maybe where I didn't put it clear yesterday is that even Chief Chicororo pointed me with a finger, I think that is where I didn't indicate yesterday, they all pointed a finger at me that day.
CHAIRPERSON: Of course you didn't die you lived to tell the tale.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Okay, now the person at that meeting, that person with the higher rank was obviously Chief Chicororo, is that correct?
MR MUNYAI: On that meeting Chief Chicororo was not invited. It's only the youth who were invited, it's only the people who - Mr Chicororo wasn't in the meeting so I'm asking that you rephrase your question?
MR VAN RENSBURG: No, I'm not worried if he was there, what I'm asking is, of the two persons between Madadzhe and Chicororo, Chicororo was the highest ranking person, is that correct?
MR MUNYAI: Yes that is correct.
MR VAN RENSBURG: And Chief Chicororo was openly defending the government of the day by saying it will not fall as long as he is in power, is that correct?
MR MUNYAI: Yes that is correct.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Now what I want to know is why didn't you attempt to kill Chief Chicororo?
MR MUNYAI: Those attempts were made before. We once went to his home at Mdisane and we tried to attempt to kill him but we failed because he wasn't there and then we destroyed everything which was there, we attempted to do so because what he was - the way in which he was ruling us was not to our will.
ADV DE JAGER: ...(inaudible)
INTERPRETER: The interpreters cannot hear you, could you please repeat?
ADV DE JAGER: You're appearing for both families of the deceased?
MR VAN RENSBURG: That is correct, yes.
ADV DE JAGER: And do you also appear for the assaulted person, Simete?
MR VAN RENSBURG: No Mr Chairperson, I do not have instructions from the said person, Mrs Simete.
ADV DE JAGER: Do you know whether she's present?
MR VAN RENSBURG: I am not aware if she's present or not, Mr Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Was she notified?
MS PATEL: Honourable Chairperson, if I may respond? We requested that these application forms be supplemented because they were vague also in terms of what specifically the applicant was applying for, the information regarding the assault is information that surfaced only today so unfortunately there was no notification in that regard.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Thank you Mr Chairperson.
Okay, we're still on the murder of Mr ...(intervention)
ADV DE JAGER: Sorry could I just interrupt you? You're appearing on behalf of the families. Are they opposing the amnesty applications?
MR VAN RENSBURG: Yes they are indeed opposing the applications.
ADV DE JAGER: On what basis an with what do they disagree so that we could focus on that and see whether we could solve that problem?
MR VAN RENSBURG: Yes, the objection is basically twofold and firstly it is that the murders were not committed with a political motive or for a political motive and secondly that there is no full disclosure of the relevant facts.
ADV DE JAGER: But is it common cause that what one can call a crowd of about 500 people approached the homes of the deceased and that they were killed in a manner testified?
MR VAN RENSBURG: No, that is definitely not in dispute although my instructions are because it was dark, we cannot put an estimation on the amount of people but obviously then it can also not be disputed but the rest of the facts, as you put it now are not in dispute.
ADV DE JAGER: If a crowd of about 500 or say 200 or whatever, a large section of the community, took part in the assassination, what was the reason for that if it wasn't political? Could it have been that it was only to get rid of somebody who was not popular and who was perceived to be a witch without being politics at all?
MR VAN RENSBURG: Yes that is in fact my instructions that the killing of these people was not for political reasons but because they were perhaps identified as witches and put on the list as it was advertised or testified. The reasons for that was eradication of witchcraft for some other reason basically for the reason that the community felt that witches were bad at that stage and it had nothing to do with political motivation or to make the government or the country ungovernable at the time. Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: So Mr van Rensburg, I think I understand the objection that it was rather a venture to eradicate witchcraft rather than any political motive. Can't we concentrate on that?
MR VAN RENSBURG: Yes, we will do that.
Can we just turn to the murder of Mr Madadzhe then? You testified that you were in fact the leader or the chairman at the meeting that was held earlier that day, is that correct?
MR MUNYAI: Yes that is correct.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Is it fair to assume that you were also in control of the proceedings that happened after the meeting?
MR MUNYAI: Yes it would be fair.
MR VAN RENSBURG: So it was you that decided which houses should be visited in which order?
MR MUNYAI: No, it's not myself that was being said by people who were in the meeting. In case of Chineko Simete, he was identified by a certain person called Rexin Maurousi.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Yes, I'm not talking about putting the names on the list, I'm talking about the events that followed after the meeting and the sequence of events. Who decided what sequence of events to follow?
MR MUNYAI: As a chairperson on that day, it's true I was reading the names as they appear on the list from the first one.
MR VAN RENSBURG: And when you arrived at the old lady's hut, the one that you were eventually convicted of assaulting, you led the interrogation, is that correct?
MR MUNYAI: Yes that is correct.
MR VAN RENSBURG: And when you arrived at the deceased, Madadzhe's house, you also asked if he is present, is that correct?
MR MUNYAI: Yes that is correct.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Okay, let's follow on then from that time. What happened after you shouted or asked if he is present, can you just tell us what happened?
MR MUNYAI: But I think we didn't ask because they were asleep, I think what happened is that we broke the window in the hut in which they used to sleep with this old lady and then we dragged him out, it's that what happened on that day.
MR VAN RENSBURG: So you participated in dragging him out of his hut, is that correct?
MR MUNYAI: No, I participated in assaulting.
MR VAN RENSBURG: So why do you say "we" dragged him out of the hut?
MR MUNYAI: I'm saying it in that on that day I was not alone, so we were many, that is why I'm saying we dragged him out.
MR VAN RENSBURG: What were you doing, you yourself doing when the people dragged him out of the hut?
MR MUNYAI: At that time while she was being dragged outside the house I was standing outside waiting to interrogate her since I was intending to do so.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr van Rensburg, when you get to a convenient stage, will you just indicate?
ADV DE JAGER: Are we now talking about Mr Madadzhe or are we talking about a female?
MR VAN RENSBURG: No, we're talking about Mr Madadzhe.
ADV DE JAGER: It's been interpreted as while she was dragged out. Are you referring to a woman or a man?
MR MUNYAI: On that day we dragged out a male person.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Yes, it was Mr Madadzhe?
MR MUNYAI: Yes that is correct, it's Mr Madadzhe.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Okay and what did you ask from him, you said you interrogated him. What did you want to know from him?
MR MUNYAI: While he was dragged out I'm the person who asked him the first question. The first question which I've asked him seeing that he was on the list of the people who were supposed to be killed, I asked her who are the other people he committed witchcraft with. He said no, he committed witchcraft alone and he said burnt me with my basket which was fully of muti or medicine.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Would you just please repeat the last part of your question regarding the muti, I didn't follow that?
MR MUNYAI: I asked him to tell me the other person, they practised witchcraft together. On that day he said he practised witchcraft being alone and he said if you want to kill him we must kill him together with his basket which was full of bottles which was containing muti or medicine.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Did you see that basket there at his hut?
MR MUNYAI: Yes I'm the person who go and fetch it after mentioning that we must burn him with it since he was saying he must be burnt with it.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Where did you fetch it from?
MR MUNYAI: It was in that room from which he was dragged out of.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Yes and after you fetched the basket of muti, what did you do then?
MR MUNYAI: I took the basket, then when I was reaching him I realised that he was dead so he was dragged to the house of that boy who is wearing a white shirt behind you there and then I threw that basket inside that house which was burnt with the deceased inside.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Are you now saying that at the time when the deceased was killed you were not even there?
MR MUNYAI: While he being killed I was there but I just hit him four times and then I went into the hut to take the basket which he was saying he must be killed with it.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Who lit the fire.
MR MUNYAI: Who lit the fire on that day is the fifth suspect who is ...(indistinct) Marausi.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Did you assist to drag ...(inaudible)
INTERPRETER: The interpreters cannot hear, the speaker's mike is not on.
ADV DE JAGER: The Chairperson asked you to indicate when you come to a convenient stage for the short adjournment.
MR VAN RENSBURG: I apologise Mr Chairperson. I can just as well continue from this point after the adjournment, that's fine.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION
LANGANANI FOSTER MUNYAI: (s.u.o.)
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR VAN RENSBURG: (cont) Thank you Mr Chairperson.
Mr Munyai, we're still talking about the first murder. Can you tell me, except for the fact that you hit the deceased four times with a stick and you fetched the muti and threw it on the fire, what was the rest of your involvement in this murder?
MR MUNYAI: Nothing I did.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Okay, who put the name of Mr Madadzhe on the list?
MR MUNYAI: It's the one who is called Tatini Ramwashe.
MR VAN RENSBURG: At the time of the murder, did you owe Mr Madadzhe any money?
MR MUNYAI: Not at all.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Is it not so that a few months before the murder you took R50 from Mr Madadzhe and your family had in the meantime arranged to pay back that money?
MR MUNYAI: That's not true, I would not kill Mr Madadzhe just because I owe him R50.
ADV DE JAGER: But that is not what's being put to you, it's not being put to you that you killed him because you owed him money, you've only been asked whether you in fact owed him R50?
MR MUNYAI: No.
MR VAN RENSBURG: And I put it to you that at the time of Mr Madadzhe's death, his family has already paid back R10 out of the R50 that you have owed him?
CHAIRPERSON: Mr van Rensburg, is it eventually going to be put to him that the reason for the killing had something to do with the debt?
MR VAN RENSBURG: Yes I will include that.
CHAIRPERSON: It's been put to you that R10 of the debt has already been repaid. What have you got to say about that?
MR MUNYAI: Could you repeat your question?
MR VAN RENSBURG: Yes I will repeat it. I put it to you that at the time of Mr Madadzhe's murder, your family has already paid back R10 of this R50 that was owing to him by you?
MR MUNYAI: I don't know about this.
MR VAN RENSBURG: I further put it to you that Mr Madadzhe was not a witch, that he was not involved in witchcraft and that he had no muti in his house on the night that he was murdered.
MR MUNYAI: That's not true.
MR VAN RENSBURG: I further put it to you that the reason why you participated in murdering Mr Madadzhe was to get rid of this debt that you owed to him?
MR MUNYAI: That's not true.
CHAIRPERSON: Is it your instructions that the whole group of people did it for the same reason?
MR VAN RENSBURG: No, Mr Chairperson, I will not go that far to put that statement to the witness.
The last question regarding the murder of Mr Madadzhe, what was Mr Malaudzi's the other applicant in this specific event or incident, what was his involvement in the murder of Mr Madadzhe?
MR MUNYAI: Can you repeat your question?
MR VAN RENSBURG: What was Mr Malaudzi's involvement in the murder, what did he do in order to kill Mr Madadzhe?
MR MUNYAI: What I'd seen on that day is that Mr Mulaudzi left the hut.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Okay, apart from setting fire to the hut what else did he do?
MR MUNYAI: Nothing I seen what he did, I only seen what he did, I just seen only when he was leaving the house.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Okay. If we can turn to the murder of Mr Maphaha then on the same date can you again just briefly or now can you again just tell us what was your personal involvement in the killing of Mr Maphaha?
MR MUNYAI: I beat him.
MR VAN RENSBURG: With what did you beat him and how many times?
MR MUNYAI: With a stick, if I'm not mistaken three times.
ADV DE JAGER: Could you just indicate to me, was it a knobkierrie, was it a stick? How thick was it, how long was it?
MR MUNYAI: It was a stick which was used as a wood for fire, it was not so thick. I can take for an example here in this house it was like this steel of the chair, it was just like this steel of the chair.
MR VAN RENSBURG: And do you say that if you hit a person with that stick you can kill him?
MR MUNYAI: As that day I was not beating him alone, it was possible that he could die because he was being beaten by many sticks.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Yes, I'm only talking about the stick that you hit him with. If you hit him alone, would he have been killed?
MR MUNYAI: I wouldn't have killed him, it would be broken.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Why would you then say, were you found guilty because you only hit him with a stick that was too thin to kill him?
MR MUNYAI: It was because I participated in the killing of him that is why I'm pleading for amnesty.
MR VAN RENSBURG: I see, okay. Regarding the murder of Mr Maphaha, I have to put it to you that the reason why you and the group killed him was because of jealousy and not because of any political motive?
MR MUNYAI: That's not true.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Did you not earlier testify that - pardon me, one second please Mr Chairperson? I will rephrase that question please.
Would you say that Mr Maphaha was a rich man?
MR MUNYAI: Mr Maphaha, I cannot say he was rich.
MR VAN RENSBURG: How many rooms did his house have?
MR MUNYAI: The house had three rooms.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Who put his name on the list?
MR MUNYAI: The name of Mr Maphaha was put by a certain man called Mampo Grogo.
MR VAN RENSBURG: In your evidence in chief you testified that a person's name was not just put on the list and then he was murdered. I want you to describe to this hearing if one of the people on the meeting where you made the list mentioned a name what happened after the mentioning of the name and before it was put on the list?
MR MUNYAI: As I was a chairperson of that meeting, I intend to ask the person who is putting that name, that person was alleged to be a witch, that why are you saying for an example Mr Maphaha was witch, he would also describe the reason why.
MR VAN RENSBURG: And if he gave a good reason the name would go on the list?
MR MUNYAI: There was no way.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Pardon, I don't understand the answer, just repeat it please?
MR MUNYAI: Yes there was.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Okay, what was the reason that was forwarded to motivate Mr Maphaha's name to go on the list?
MR MUNYAI: It is after there was a missing of that child that I made that she was plus or minus twelve years, there was claim that she was last seen with Mr Maphaha.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Now before that person who put Mr Maphaha's name gave that motivation, had you heard this rumour before that the child went missing went it was last seen with Mr Maphaha?
MR MUNYAI: On that time that was about two weeks the child was already missed I've heard about that rumour.
MR VAN RENSBURG: And therefore you agreed for the name to go on the list?
MR MUNYAI: Yes.
MR VAN RENSBURG: Now I have to put it to you again that Mr Maphaha was no witch, that he did not practice witchcraft and that the reason why he was murdered was because he was richer than the other people in the community?
MR MUNYAI: That's not true.
MR VAN RENSBURG: I have no further questions, thank you Mr Chairperson.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VAN RENSBURG
MS PATEL: Thank you Honourable Chairperson, I have no questions.
NO CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS PATEL
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Ndou, have you got any re-examination?
MR NDOU: None, thank you Mr Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Just one actual question I've got.
So when you got all this information when people were talking about who must get on the list you honestly believed what the people were saying about those others?
MR MUNYAI: Could you repeat your question?
CHAIRPERSON: You accepted as the truth that - I'm talking about in the meeting?
MR MUNYAI: When we were in the meeting, what was considered it was what we consider what we call in Venda, I don't know how can I put it, I can say popular view that is that thing being having more support.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you.
WITNESS EXCUSED
