Amnesty Hearings

CHAIRPERSON: Welcome to this session of the hearings. Mr Shabalala may I remind you that you are still under oath to speak the truth. Do you understand that?

MBUSO ENOCK SHABALALA: (s.u.o.)

Yes I know that.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes thank you. Mr Hugo you may continue.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR HUGO: (cont)

Thank you Mr Chair. Mr Shabalala I just want to get back to your present ID book. Are you still using the identity book that was handed in as Exhibit F at present?

MR SHABALALA: Yes I am still using that ID.

MR HUGO: So you have not endeavoured to get a proper ID with your real name and the real particulars?

MR SHABALALA: I have tried but I did not know how to go about it.

MR HUGO: May I ask you have you also got a driver's licence which is obviously should form part of the present identity book?

MR SHABALALA: Yes I do have a driver's licence that I am using in my work.

MR HUGO: And is that driver's licence in the name of Shabalala or Mavuso?

MR SHABALALA: It is in the name of Mavuso.

MR HUGO: And how did you go about in getting this driver's licence in the name of Mavuso?

MR SHABALALA: I proceeded to try to get a licence until I got it and it was then inserted as part of my ID.

MR HUGO: So for the purposes of Mr de Kock's testimony you didn't get a false driver's licence from Mr de Kock. You obtained this driver's licence at a later stage. Is that correct?

MR SHABALALA: Yes I got it after a while.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you get your driver's licence subsequent to the changed ID?

MR SHABALALA: My driver's licence I got only after I had got my ID.

MR HUGO: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Shabalala I just want clarity on one aspect. I did ask you about it yesterday. Is it in fact true that your recruitment took place in Newcastle and you were so-called turned by the security police in Newcastle and not via the security police at Vlakplaas. Is that correct?

MR SHABALALA: Yes that is correct.

MR HUGO: So you were just handed over to the policemen that were stationed at Vlakplaas after you had been recruited?

MR SHABALALA: Yes correct.

MR HUGO: Now when you arrived at Vlakplaas your duties were spelt out to you. Is that correct?

MR SHABALALA: Yes I was told.

MR HUGO: Now what were these duties again?

MR SHABALALA: My duty was to identity and to cooperate generally with the police in a proper manner.

MR HUGO: Well let me just try and make it easier for you. Mr de Kock will testify and when he comes to testify he will say that the duties of the askaris in general were the following. Maybe you must just comment as I go through these duties. One was the recruiting of sources. Do you agree with that?

MR SHABALALA: Yes I agree.

MR HUGO: Two was the tracking of arms and ammunition. Do you agree with that?

MR SHABALALA: Yes I agree with that too.

MR HUGO: And three was the recruiting of sources especially at places where people would gather socially like shebeens, etc. Do you agree with that?

MR SHABALALA: Yes that too I agree.

MR HUGO: Then another duty was to be in a position where you could observe people moving to and fro from taxi ranks. Do you agree with that?

MR SHABALALA: No I don't know of that.

MR HUGO: You were never told to go to taxi ranks and or railway stations to go and look out for possible trained ANC cadres and freedom fighters?

CHAIRPERSON: Looking for them in the taxi rank and the train stations?

MR HUGO: That is correct Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you understand the question Mr Shabalala?

MR SHABALALA: Yes I do understand it. I agree with that.

MR HUGO: And was it also part of your duties to at times pretend that you are still a trained so-called terrorist to find out or to enable you to make contact with real freedom fighters and to ascertain their whereabouts?

MR SHABALALA: Yes I agree with that too.

MR HUGO: And is it also true that you never as askaris had carte blanche to just go and kill people randomly. That these things were all done structured and on orders of your superiors. Is that correct?

MR SHABALALA: I do not follow the question.

CHAIRPERSON: The question is that as askaris you were not free to go and kill as and when you like. You could only do so upon being given specific orders to do so. Is that your question?

MR HUGO: That is indeed the question. Thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you understand the question?

MR SHABALALA: Yes I hear the question.

MR HUGO: Well do you agree with that particular statement and the evidence that Mr de Kock will give in this regard? Is that in fact true?

MR SHABALALA: Yes I agree we were not allowed to go and kill carte blanche.

MR HUGO: Mr de Kock will also testify Mr Shabalala that the protection of the identities and the existence of askaris were of paramount importance and that had to be protected and shielded away from the public eye at all costs. Is that correct?

MR SHABALALA: Yes that is correct.

MR HUGO: Whilst we are on this topic I think you said in your affidavit that you came to know that Shosha died I think in the early nineties. Is that correct?

MR SHABALALA: I only heard about that and that is how I put it that I heard. I cannot confirm it myself.

MR HUGO: Now Mr Shabalala I think that you testified that information on the deceased was to the effect that he was a member of the ANC. Can you remember that?

MR SHABALALA: Yes I remember.

MR HUGO: Now it is important to tell this honourable Committee who told you that the deceased was a member of the ANC?

MR SHABALALA: Firstly when we got to Barkley East we heard it from the white man who came with Dandala who also read the name out and also showed us his photograph. That then made us know that he was an ANC member. He emphasised that Shosha also knew the deceased in that they together had been to training outside. That is what I can say.

MR HUGO: And you cannot recall the name of this white man who gave you the information at the time?

MR SHABALALA: No I do not know the name. I did not ask that white man.

MR HUGO: Now didn't you find it peculiar that you being a member of the South African Police were now instructed to go into Transkei which was a foreign country to go and carry out an operation?

MR SHABALALA: As far as I could see it to me it made no difference because I was only following orders that I got then.

MR HUGO: But didn't you find it necessary to say to him but look if the Transkei wants to take action against their own people they must do their own dirty work why must we do it for them?

MR SHABALALA: I could have done so but it was not easy for me to ask.

MR HUGO: Well why was it not easy for you to ask?

MR SHABALALA: There were seniors who were there who knew everything and I just had to follow orders. I didn't know much and comply with those orders.

MR HUGO: Mr Shabalala I just want to get back to the identity document again. I am just going through within the sequence that you testify. Do you have any personal knowledge as to how Mr de Kock had to go about things to arrange for a forged identity document to be given to you?

MR SHABALALA: No I do not know.

MR HUGO: Mr Chairman in this regard Mr de Kock will testify at length as to how he did this but it will serve no purpose whatsoever to put it to this witness.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes very well Mr Hugo.

MR HUGO: Mr Shabalala were you to your personal knowledge aware of the fact that there was close co-operation between the South African Police more specifically the security police in South Africa and the security police in Transkei before this incident, during this incident and after this incident?

MR SHABALALA: No I did not know.

MR HUGO: Another aspect that I just want to canvas with you is the false registration number plates. Where did these number plates come from?

MR SHABALALA: The one we used we got at Barkley East if I am not mistaken.

MR HUGO: Well I would like you to try and think carefully now from whom in Barkley East did you get these false number plates?

MR SHABALALA: We got the number plates the morning before we left we got those number plates from that white man.

MR HUGO: Would you be able to identify this particular white man if a photo of him were to be shown to you?

MR SHABALALA: No I don't think so.

MR HUGO: Let's just get back to the incident or occasion when you were given instructions at Vlakplaas. Can you remember who gave you instructions when you left Vlakplaas to go to Barkley East?

MR SHABALALA: The instruction we got from Bra Mos who was supposed to accompany us. Captain Mos who went with us. That we are going to such and such a place. He having had orders from those who were above him.

MR HUGO: Well let me put it to you that Mr de Kock says his recollection is a little bit vague as to what exactly took place at that occasion. Except that his recollection is that he just called you together and he just told you that you are going down to Barkley East with the general brief to go and look for so-called terrorists in the Eastern Cape. Can you recall anything to that effect?

MR SHABALALA: Let me say I am trying my best to recall, I am trying to recall all details. I cannot disagree with him not (...indistinct)

MR HUGO: Then I want to know more about the photo's that were shown to you, the photo albums. Were these photo's shown to you for the first time in Barkley East or at Vlakplaas?

MR SHABALALA: These photographs we had a photo album we got another one at Barkley East. Same photographs that looked like the ones we had.

MR HUGO: Yes and at Barkley East who showed you the photograph?

MR SHABALALA: We were given these photographs by this white man who was leading those from Umtata at Transkei.

MR HUGO: Mr Shabalala have you got any personal knowledge as to how these albums were compiled and how they were being used at Vlakplaas and by the security police in general?

MR SHABALALA: As to how they are compiled I do not know but those photographs were there. As to how they were acquired I do not know.

MR HUGO: Mr Chairman this is once more an aspect that Mr de Kock will testify about but I definitely can't put it to this witness. Mr Shabalala is it also true that the arrangement was that whenever askaris and members of Vlakplaas would go down to a different region that they would then fall under the command of the OC that was in charge of the security branch in this particular region. Are you aware of that?

CHAIRPERSON: Fall under the command of whom?

MR HUGO: The OC, the officer commanding of the security branch.

MR SHABALALA: Yes we were under such officer commanding.

MR HUGO: Now Mr Shabalala I just want to proceed a bit. And you will remember that you said that you didn't have a radio in the car - and I am talking about this period after Mr Ndondo had been killed. You didn't have a radio in the car but you had phone numbers at your disposal. Do you remember saying that?

MR SHABALALA: Yes correct.

MR HUGO: Whose phone numbers did you have?

MR SHABALALA: The phone numbers we had were of that white man from Umtata and also phone numbers at the Barkley East police station.

MR HUGO: And what other numbers did you have?

MR SHABALALA: I think the ones we had are that two only that we used when we were around in Transkei.

MR HUGO: Didn't you have a phone number of a person in Elliot as well?

MR SHABALALA: I cannot be certain about that. It could be that Captain Mos had it but I knew about the one at Barkley East.

MR HUGO: I am not clear in my own mind when you said that you had a phone number of this white policeman in Umtata. Is this now a different person from the white man that you met at Barkley East when you came down in the first place?

MR SHABALALA: I am referring to the same person, the one we met at Barkley East. We had his phone numbers and of the police station at Barkley East.

MR HUGO: Ja but why did you say the white man from Umtata, was he stationed at Umtata and did he just meet you at Barkley East or what is the situation?

MR SHABALALA: That is my mistake. I meant the one at Barkley East, the one we met at Barkley East.

MR HUGO: Mr Shabalala you also make mention of the fact that the sliding door of the kombi could only be opened from outside. Can you recall that?

MR SHABALALA: What I said was that when you are inside you could only open the door from outside. Not that it would open outside but that you could only open the door with your hand from the outside.

MR HUGO: Yes. Now was there anything sinister about this? Was this done in anticipation of an operation that would be carried out or did it just happen in a sense that the handle fell off or just got lost during other operations?

MR SHABALALA: The door had always been defective for a long time it has been defective and we were using that car as it was.

MR HUGO: I also just want to get to the question of the tinted windows of the kombi. What was the purpose of the tinted windows as far as you were concerned?

MR SHABALALA: As far as I know the reason why the windows had to be tinted that enabled us to see outside who may not be able to identify us who were inside the kombi.

MR HUGO: So to really put it in a nutshell it was to protect the identities of the askaris inside the kombi?

MR SHABALALA: That is what I can say yes.

MR HUGO: Now Mr Shabalala I just want you to go to page 62 of the bundle of documents in front of you.

MALE SPEAKER 1: Through you Mr Chairperson before that I would like to ask one question in connection with the door. Mr Shabalala was it not deliberate that the door could not be opened from within the kombi and perhaps to assist you do you know of any other vehicle used by security police whose door would not open from within? For example to prevent people who have been arrested from escaping? Do you understand my question?

MR SHABALALA: Yes I hear the question. But you see we used a lot of cars but this kombi particularly I saw it that way but others we had normal cars that you could open from inside or outside. But this one had a problem with his door. I do not know who made it that way. I would not be able to account for that.

MALE SPEAKER 1: In other words you are saying it was not normal practice for vehicles used by security police to be made in such a way that the doors should not open from within?

MR SHABALALA: As far as I am concerned this is the only kombi that I found to be like that and I did not take special note as to whether that was made deliberately for perhaps holding people hostage who are inside. I did not take note.

MALE SPEAKER 1: Thank you Mr Chairperson.

MR HUGO: Mr Shabalala after the incident you testified that you went to the police station at Elliot and that there were a lot, well if I say a lot I might be mistaken but there were white people there. Can you remember that?

MR SHABALALA: When we went to that police station I do not remember myself alighting from the car. It was Captain Mos who went out and went into the charge office and then returned accompanied by two white people I do not know for sure. If I am not mistaken two white men.

MR HUGO: Is it two at Elliot who was at that particular point in time not part of the Transkei? This was now part of South Africa.

MR SHABALALA: Yes that was the case.

MR HUGO: And the two white men that came out with Bra Mos were they the same or let me rather put it - do you know who they are?

MR SHABALALA: No I did not know them.

MR HUGO: One of them, was this not the same person that you met at Barkley East when you came down initially?

MR SHABALALA: To me even the one we met at Barkley East I had not even got used to his face. It was a very short time that I met him. It could have been that he was part of that too but I cannot be certain about that because I saw him only for one day.

MR HUGO: When you said that Bra Mos gave them a report as to what happened could you hear what he was telling them?

MR SHABALALA: No I could not hear what they were saying because I was inside the car.

MR HUGO: Did Bra Mos just tell you that he reported to them?

MR SHABALALA: He told us when he came back that he did make an effort.

MR HUGO: Now Mr Shabalala I just want you to go back to page - it is actually it starts at page 61 of the bundle of documents. Now I am not going to ask you about the contents of this particular document to try and discredit your credibility but I think this document is extremely important. Would you agree that it appears to be a warning statement taken by a certain Colonel E Willy? Do you agree with that?

MR SHABALALA: The statement I made at Nxala is not here.

MR HUGO: No, no all that I want to know is do you agree with the statement that this appears to be a warning statement taken by Colonel E Willy on the face of it extensively so?

MR SHABALALA: I can only say I do not know anything about this statement. He may have made this statement. I can see it but I do not know anything about it.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Shabalala we know that your evidence is that you do not know this statement. What counsel is asking you is if you look at this document which commences at page 61 and runs through to page 65 it appears that it is a warning statement. But that is not to say that you made it. But if one looks at it, it appears that it is a warning statement. If you read it. You do know what is a warning statement do you or do you not? Where a person who is suspected of having committed a crime is warned that he is not obliged to make any statement and whatever he says that may be held against him. Do you know that warning?

MR SHABALALA: Yes I know a warning.

CHAIRPERSON: Now if you look at the first page particular page 61 does that not look to you like a warning statement?

MR SHABALALA: Yes it is a warning statement.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes thank you.

MR HUGO: Now Mr Shabalala maybe I must put it to you what I am going to argue at a later stage and you will understand what we are trying to get at. I am going to argue that this warning statement is a very clear indication of a huge cover-up that took place between the security police of the Transkei and the South African security police and that in this statement facts are contained that could not have been gleaned from you and that could only have come from very close co-operation on a very high level between the Transkeian security police maybe politicians and the South African security police. Do you understand what I am going to argue in respect of this statement?

MR SHABALALA: Yes I hear that.

MR HUGO: Therefore it is important for me to just go through this statement so that we can see which of the facts contained in this statement are fabrications and which ones are in fact true. Now you will see on page 61, right at the top they have got your names there; Mbuso Enock Shabalala. That is correct isn't it?

MR SHABALALA: Correct.

MR HUGO: Your race is Zulu. That is also correct isn't it so?

MR SHABALALA: Correct.

MR HUGO: The residential address is given as Umtata police camp. That is not correct at all isn't it?

MR SHABALALA: Yes. No it cannot be true.

MR HUGO: Your business employment address is given as the security branch Umtata. You have never been a member of the security branch in Umtata. Is that correct?

MR SHABALALA: No it is not true.

MR HUGO: Well are you saying it is not true in a sense that you haven't been a member of the security branch in Umtata?

MR SHABALALA: No I never was.

MR HUGO: Your occupation is given as a special constable. Is that correct?

MR SHABALALA: No it is not true.

MR HUGO: And what I am really interested in is the identity number there 1/5597435/3. Is that your correct identity number?

MR SHABALALA: This identity seems to be the one I was referring to as the one that I used to hold in my initial past.

MR HUGO: So somebody must have had access to your file to at least obtain the correct information pertaining to your correct identity number. Is that not so?

MR SHABALALA: Yes I would say it can be true because I can see it.

MR HUGO: So now if we just proceed. Then it says

"I have been informed by a Colonel E Willy."

Have you ever met a person by the name of Colonel E Willy?

MR SHABALALA: No I do not know this one.

MR HUGO: And then it goes further and it says

"He is investigating an allegation of a description place, etc and then he says murder at Nxala on the 24th of September 1985 at eleven p.m."

Did the incident happen at eleven p.m. on the 24th?

MR SHABALALA: I don't understand.

MALE SPEAKER 1: Through you Mr Chairperson. The time is eleven a.m.

MR HUGO: I am sorry Mr Chairman did I say eleven p.m.? Sorry I beg your pardon. Eleven a.m. Was it eleven 'o clock in the morning?

MR SHABALALA: When this matter occurred?

MR HUGO: When Mr Ndondo was killed yes. What was the time when he was killed?

MR SHABALALA: It could have been about nine or ten. If I am not mistaken. As I have said in my statement.

MR HUGO: And then you will see right at the bottom it says: "Received by me Umtata. The date the 3rd of October 1985." And this certain Mr Willy had the audacity to sign this document. Do you see that?

MR SHABALALA: Yes I see that.

MR HUGO: Now if you will just go back to page 50 of the bundle of documents right at the bottom. Let me read it to you. This is one of your affidavits and you say there

"At the end of that month,"

that is now obviously September,

"we returned to Vlakplaas."

Was that indeed correct? Did you go back to Vlakplaas at the end of September?

MR SHABALALA: Yes we returned to Vlakplaas. It is correct.

MR HUGO: So you could not have given this statement in Umtata to this Colonel Willy on the 3rd of October 1985. Is that correct?

MR SHABALALA: Yes correct.

MR HUGO: Now will you please turn to page 62. Mr Chairman unfortunately I have to go through this thing. I will try and do it as quickly as possible but I do think this is extremely important. But I will try and go through it as quickly as possible.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes indeed.

MR HUGO: Mr Shabalala you will se there the first paragraph says again

"I am a special constable in the Transkeian police attached to the security police and stationed at Umtata."

This is a lie isn't it so?

MR SHABALALA: No I do not know about this.

MR HUGO: Then it says that you handed yourself over to the South African Police at Ermelo and you were released during January 1982. That is more or less correct isn't it?

MR SHABALALA: Yes.

MR HUGO: Then it says, which is very important.

"I was then employed by the Transkeian Police to assist them in combating and investigating the activities of the ANC in the Republic of Transkei."

This is a blatant lie isn't it so?

MR SHABALALA: No it is not true.

MR HUGO: Then it says in the next paragraph

"On Thursday the 19th of September 1985 at approximately 13h00 you and Constable Mos and an informer was on duty at Nqgobo."

This is also a lie isn't it?

MR SHABALALA: No I don't know about this.

MR HUGO: It then proceeds in this paragraph to say that you saw a certain terrorist names Treasure and you were then told by the informer that he was trained in Maseru and he was trained in a course in politics, firearms and explosives by the ANC. This is another blatant lie isn't it?

MR SHABALALA: No there is no such.

MR HUGO: Then the next paragraph it says that you, Bra Mos and the informer went and arrest this certain Treasure at Nqgobo. That is also a lie isn't it?

MR SHABALALA: No it is not true.

MR HUGO: And it says then that it was subsequently established that this person was a certain Charles Mbalu and this was reported to Brigadier Damooi. Have you got any knowledge of this?

MR SHABALALA: No I don't know of anything about it.

MR HUGO: The next paragraph it says on the 20th of September 1985, this is now on a Friday Mos and yourself visited Mbalu at the Kofimvaba Prison. Have you ever been there?

MR SHABALALA: No I don't know of this.

MR HUGO: Then it goes further and it makes an absolute ludicrous statement of saying that Mbalu then admitted that he himself and two friends namely Ndondo residing at Nxala and a certain Vum residing at Mount Frere were with him and - I am not going to read the whole contents or the rest of this paragraph. But they were all trained ANC members. Have you got any knowledge of this?

MR SHABALALA: No I don't know of anything like that.

MR HUGO: ...Damooi to arrest Vum and Ndondo. This is also a lie isn't it so?

MR SHABALALA: Yes correct that is so.

MR HUGO: On the next paragraph page 63 it says that on Sunday you went to Mount Frere with the view of arresting this certain Mr Thobele Vum and when you arrived there he had fled and that you suspected that he heard about Mbalu's arrest and decided to flee. This is also a blatant lie isn't it so?

MR SHABALALA: Yes it is false.

MR HUGO: The next paragraph it says on the 24th of September you were then instructed by the security branch at Nxala that they had received instructions from the security branch in Umtata to arrest Ndondo should they see him. This is also a lie isn't it so?

MR SHABALALA: Yes it is false all of it.

MR HUGO: And then it proceeds to give detailed information about the car's registration number, etc, etc. This is also false isn't it?

MR SHABALALA: Yes all of this I hear today is false.

MR HUGO: And then they proceed with this nonsense of saying that Mr Ndondo was dressed in pyjamas. This is also false to the best of your knowledge?

MR SHABALALA: Yes there is no such thing that he had on pyjamas.

MR HUGO: Now right at the bottom of page 63 it says and extensively you are now the person speaking here

"As I approached Ndondo he got up and grabbed hold of the pistol which he was trying to wrench from my grip."

This is also devoid of all truth isn't that?

MR SHABALALA: All false.

MR HUGO: Then on page 64 almost in the middle of the page you extensively said

"I noticed a pocket knife in the left hand and Constable's Mos handcuffs in the right hand. The informer went to Ndondo and told Constable Mos that he should be hand-cuffed as he was still alive and might run away."

This is also a blatant lie isn't it so?

MR SHABALALA: All false.

MR HUGO: Then the next paragraph it says

"Then we saw a lot of people were gathering around the house and we decided to take Ndondo away and take him to a hospital."

This is also false isn't it?

MR SHABALALA: All false.

MR HUGO: The next paragraph says

"Then a man named Victor Masaleke arrived in the same red Volkswagen Golf and enquired about the incident."

Do you know about a man arriving in a red Golf afterwards and who enquired about the incident?

MR SHABALALA: No there is no such.

MR HUGO: Then the next paragraph where it says that you yourself reported the incident to Lieutenant Gelili and that you took him to the scene where the incident occurred and explained exact the circumstances that lead to the shooting of Ndondo. This is also a lie isn't it so?

MR SHABALALA: It is all a lie.

MR HUGO: And where it says purportedly in your statement that Thulili was then taken back to the police station and you then returned to Umtata and reported the incident once more to Brigadier Damooi. This is also a lie isn't it?

MR SHABALALA: It is all false.

MR HUGO: By the way have you ever met a person by the name of Brigadier Damooi in your life?

MR SHABALALA: No I don't even know him. I don't think he knows me.

MR HUGO: And then finally on page 65 it says

"I want to state clearly that Batandwa Ndondo was escaping from lawful custody after being arrested for suspected terrorist activities. I believe that we would never have been able to prevent his escape by any other means than to shoot him. I fired five shots at Ndondo with a 9mm parabellum number whatever issued to me by the Transkeian police on the date of my appointment as a special constable."

This is also a blatant lie isn't it?

MR SHABALALA: All false.

CHAIRPERSON: Well wait a minute are you saying that sentence contains a number of allegations i.e. you fired shots. You said you fired how many, four shots I think it is?

MR SHABALALA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay so it is the number of shots that you are disputing. Were you using the 9mm Parabellum?

MR SHABALALA: In this statement it is not true as has been written there. I did not use a firearm issued by Transkeian Police.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes I understand that but did you use a 9mm? You used that didn't you?

MR SHABALALA: Yes a 9mm.

CHAIRPERSON: But that was not issued by the Transkeian Police?

MR SHABALALA: Correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Because you were never appointed by them as a special constable?

MR SHABALALA: Correct.

CHAIRPERSON: This statement I believe that we would never have been given to prevent his escape by any other means than to shoot him.

MR SHABALALA: I agree with this part.

CHAIRPERSON: But the fact of the matter though is that this is not what you said. You didn't tell anyone this. You didn't make this statement though.

MR SHABALALA: Not one in this statement is written by me.

MR HUGO: Thank you Mr Chair. Mr Shabalala I just want you then to turn to page 17 of the bundle of documents. I know you are not an expert and neither am I but would you agree with me that this statement seems to have been typed on the same typewriter as your - if I say your statement the statement contained in the bundle from pages 61 up to pages 65. On the face of it.

MR SHABALALA: It is apparently the same typewriter.

MR HUGO: And you will see on page 17 and it is a little bit faint but there it says "A20." Can you see that?

MR SHABALALA: Yes I do.

MR HUGO: And on page 61 of the bundle there it says "A19." Do you see that?

MR SHABALALA: Yes I do.

MR HUGO: Have you ever had the occasion of dealing with dockets, dossiers when you investigating offences that were committed in your capacity as a normal policeman?

MR SHABALALA: No I did not. No I never did.

MR HUGO: Mr Chairman maybe at this point I must just formally apply to obtain access to this particular docket if it is still available. It appears that the document appearing on page 16 of the bundle is part of this document. And this is numbered A20. So we can all safely assume that there are at least another 18 documents or statements in this docket. And I have reason to believe that it will shed a great amount of light on the cover-up that took place in this particular matter. We haven't had sight of these other documents. I know that my learned friend has indicated that he has in his possession the unsigned statements by Bra Mos and Shosha. But I think it would be of great importance to this Committee if we could get access to all these documents. And it will to my mind reveal a lot of information that needs to be brought to the attention of the Committee.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mapoma do we have the docket here? The docket of this matter?

MR MAPOMA: No Chairperson we don't have the docket as the docket but we do have some documents which seem to have been extracted from the docket. But the entire docket as it is we don't have it.

CHAIRPERSON: But do we know what happened to the docket?

MR MAPOMA: Unfortunately Sir I don't but I think the variety of documents that we have with us perhaps my learned friend if he catches sight of them perhaps all the documents contain that he may require in the regiments that we have.

CHAIRPERSON: I suggest that after we adjourned today and before we resume the next hearing perhaps Mr Hugo and Mr Mapoma and the other legal representatives should get together and see whether they can locate either the docket itself or the other statements which were made. Conduct further investigation. I understand that Mr Dukada has certain statements which may also be of assistance I gather. Do you want to say anything?

MR DUKADA: That is correct Mr Chairman thank you. Mr Chairman in support of what has already been said by my colleague Mr Hugo I happen to go through a wad of documents which I received from the TRC office. One of the documents is the inquest findings. An inquest was held in this matter and the magistrate at Nxala made findings. And in the second document which sets out a list of statements which were submitted at the magistrate, one of the statements is that of Mr Shabalala and the first thing I ask from Mr Mapoma whether the statement is available. Because all that I found is only the findings of the magistrate at the first page of the inquest record and the second page which consists of the various statements which were submitted at the magistrate. I suggest that if Mr Mapoma has access to the inquest record or any other person that would be helpful for us.

CHAIRPERSON: Do we have the record of the inquest?

MR MAPOMA: Chairperson I think I must explain this once again. We don't have the inquest record with us. The information that we received was that from Nxala the inquest record was alleged to have been taken by the police at Queenstown where Inspector Jordaan is also involved. And we pursued this with Inspector Jordaan. He said they don't have this inquest record nor the inquest findings. What he has with him there are the extracts of the statements that were made to the inquest proceedings. And those documents all that he had are the documents that he handed over to us. We do have some documents with us which we received from him. But we cannot say that there are some documents which he has that we do not have. All I am saying Chairperson is that all the documents that we managed to get from Inspector Jordaan are with us. Some of those documents relate to the inquest proceedings and any party is welcome to have access to those documents. They are with me. I do have them.

CHAIRPERSON: You haven't had sight of those statements Mr Hugo?

MR HUGO: No Mr Chairman. Not at all. And let me just put it clear for purposes of the record I am not suggesting that there is any improper conduct from my colleague's point of view. We are just trying to get as much information as possible. May I also just put it on record that I intend arranging for a subpoena to be issued against this Colonel Willy so that he can come and explain to us where he got his information from but that will obviously be dealt with at a later stage.

Mr Shabalala (...intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: ...(inaudible) this matter now. At a convenient time would you make whatever documents you may have to Mr Hugo and see whether you can collate those documents and see whether they tie up with the sequential numbering of the documents that were supposed to have been in the docket. And then perhaps Mr Dukada may also share whatever documents he might have with the rest of the legal team. But it seems to me that an attempt should be made to locate the docket as far as it is practical for you to do so and also if necessary to speak to is it Inspector Jordaan who took the statements in 1997. See what happened to the docket. And try and get whatever documents that are available in regard to this matter as we can gather. Okay?

MR MAPOMA: Certainly Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes very well. Thank you.

MR HUGO: Thank you very much Mr Chair. Mr Shabalala then I want to just ask you a question pertaining to your first appearance in the court in Umtata. Can you remember who accompanied you from Vlakplaas to Umtata when you had to appear in court for the first time?

MR SHABALALA: It was Bra Mos.

MR HUGO: Was it only the two of you that came down or were there some other members from Vlakplaas who came down just to protect you as well?

MR SHABALALA: No it was only the two of us.

MR HUGO: Now have you got any independent recollection as to who the investigating officer in Umtata was in your case?

MR SHABALALA: No I do not remember. I do not know them.

MR HUGO: And when you arrived in Umtata did you sleep over?

MR SHABALALA: We returned back without having slept overnight.

MR HUGO: Then there is just one last aspect that I want to deal with and that was the reward that was paid to you, the R500. Was this the first time that you were paid an extra amount for an operation that you took part in?

MR SHABALALA: It was the first time.

MR HUGO: And was it also the last time?

MR SHABALALA: It was the last time yes.

MR HUGO: Did you ask any questions as to why you are now getting an amount of R500 more?

MR SHABALALA: No I did not ask. I simply took the money.

MR HUGO: Were you aware of the policy that was introduced by the security police pertaining to compensation to askaris whenever they took part in operations where so-called terrorists were killed?

MR SHABALALA: No I did not know that there may have been monies that are deducted except the one that I ultimately got for the first time and the last.

CHAIRPERSON: You are just being asked at this stage of whether were you aware of any policy?

MR SHABALALA: I don't know what you are referring to.

CHAIRPERSON: Perhaps you may want to repeat the question Mr Hugo?

MR HUGO: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Shabalala you received this amount of R500 but was there to the best of your knowledge and recollection a general policy in terms where of askaris would be compensated? For instance if you are aware of it you would for instance know that if a terrorist is killed you get R500. If a AK47 is found you get R300. Or whatever the case might be. Were you aware of such a general policy?

MR SHABALALA: Yes I knew about that in relation to weapons.

MR HUGO: And in relation to the killing of people what was the general policy?

MR SHABALALA: If it was a person who was well-trained and arms were found from him even if he was not dead they would give you money besides or over and above your salary.

MR HUGO: And how much money would be given? Were there fixed amounts in respect of people that were killed?

MR SHABALALA: No there was no fixed amount. But in relation to weapons there was. If it is an AK, limpet mine or whatever there was a fixed amount. But in relation to different items I would not know what the standard amount would be.

MR HUGO: Mr Chairman I think this is another aspect where my client will testify as to what the structures were, what the policies were, etc, etc. I don't think this particular witness can take it any further.

Lastly Mr Shabalala, Mr de Kock says and his recollection is also not very clear on this. You might be right or he might be wrong but let me put it to you. He says that his recollection is that you were never then after this incident put on the records of the police force again and that you were registered as a source of the police force and that you got paid out of the secret fund instead of being put back on the formal records of the police force. What is your recollection as far as that is concerned?

MR SHABALALA: After this incident before having changed my ID's until it was changed I stayed on getting the salary in cash to pay my house, a subsidy house. They used to pay me in cash and whatever amounts I need to get I would get in cash. It took some time that I got that amount. Even when I get my money of my new appointment certificate my money was reduced. They still proceeded giving me cash trying to make up for the shortfall so that I could pay for my house.

MR HUGO: But do I understand from you that after this incident you were paid in cash? You never got a cheque from the police?

MR SHABALALA: I can say I used to get a cheque and then added cash over and above it.

MR HUGO: Mr Chairman we will deal with this matter once more as one of the things that my client will be able to shed light on. I have no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR HUGO: .

CHAIRPERSON: I do not know to what extent if any the documents that you may not have seen which are in possession of Mr Mapoma might not necessitate your further questioning of Mr Shabalala on matters arising from those documents. Perhaps during the tea adjournment if you can just scan through those documents and see whether there is anything that might arise from those documents. And also during the cross-examination by other members of the legal team.

MR HUGO: Yes I will certainly try and do that. Thank you Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Dilizo.

MR DILIZO: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman the same thing will also apply with me. I would love before I could finish my cross-examination to have had access to the documents which have been referred to also by Mr Hugo. But I will be able to commence with my cross-examination now.

CHAIRPERSON: From the Committee's standpoint we would love to see your face when you cross-examine this witness.

MR DILIZO: Thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you think you could swop places. Mr Hugo if you could just move onto the next seat yes. Very well.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR DILIZO: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Shabalala that there is the statement which appears on page 63 of the bundle in respect of which you have denied knowledge and authorship. Can you be in a position to explain to this Committee how come that such a statement was found in this bundle?

CHAIRPERSON: The answer would be that whoever put together the bundle must have put it here. You probably should ask him does he know how the statement came to exist at all. Is that what you are trying to find out first?

MR DILIZO: Into existence. I would love to know whether he is in a position to tell us as to how come that this document was ever authored.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes indeed. Do you understand the question Mr Shabalala?

MR SHABALALA: Yes I hear the question.

MR DILIZO: So what is your answer Mr Shabalala?

MR SHABALALA: My answer. I will only give an answer to a question.

CHAIRPERSON: The question that is being put to you is if you say you did not make this statement to Colonel Willy do you know where this statement then come from?

MR SHABALALA: No I do not know.

MR DILIZO: Would you agree with the impression that it must therefore have been intended to make some cover-ups with regard to the death of Batandwa?

MR SHABALALA: It is over who will be the one to properly give an answer. I did not even read it. I do not know it.

MR DILIZO: Yes my point is that when looking at it one would gain the impression that it was intended to deface the actual facts with regard to the facts relating to the death of Batandwa. Would you agree with that impression or not?

MR SHABALALA: It is so because it does not contain any truth in it.

MR DILIZO: Were you aware of any cover-ups that perhaps were being perpetrated by your superiors with regard to the death of the so-called terrorist?

MR SHABALALA: I do not know of any cover-ups.

MR DILIZO: So was the change of your surname not also intended to be cover-up with regard to identity as a culprit in the case of Batandwa Ndondo?

MR SHABALALA: Yes that was a cover-up as far as I can see, the issue of my ID.

MR DILIZO: Did that not convey the impression to you that your superiors were in favour of such killings of the so-called terrorists?

MR SHABALALA: Yes that is so.

MR DILIZO: And therefore that even the death of Batandwa Ndondo had been approved by your superiors in view of the fact that there were these certain cover-ups?

MR SHABALALA: I will agree and say that that is correct.

MR DILIZO: Mr Shabalala would perhaps these cover-ups not have had a certain effect in your memory with regard to the remembrance of the date in question? In that for instance there are statements like the one appearing from page 63 of which you are not aware. There is the question of the change of ownership. Matters like that could they not have had any bearing in affecting your memory with regard to the events of the date in question?

MR SHABALALA: All of these things did not disturb my statement and have not affected my ability to give a proper statement right now.

MR DILIZO: So the statement you made which appears from page, that is starts from page 71 of the bundle up to page 79 of the bundle are the facts contained therein not have to a certain extent been affected by these cover-ups to the extent that you might have not have properly remembered them?

MR SHABALALA: (...indistinct) at this statement that was signed by me I can only say it reflects what I remembered. That was not affected by anything. It was simply all of that I recalled. I tried my best to recollect all what happened.

MR DILIZO: So that in your evidence you testified that it is Mr Dandala who went into the house to call Batandwa. Was that correct?

MR SHABALALA: Correct.

MR DILIZO: And even in your statement appearing from page 71 to 79 you also stated, Mr Chairman I think that statement is on page 74 of the record at the bottom. I will read it more or less. The last sentence which starts with the word

"After Batandwa was identified we drove a little way past the house and made a U-turn. And Uncle Mos called Batandwa Ndondo who was still in the garden of the house where he had stopped with the vehicle. Batandwa walked closer. Uncle Mos told Batandwa that we were policemen and simultaneously Dandala showed his Transkeian police appointment certificate to Batandwa."

So my point of emphasis there is that Batandwa Ndondo was still in the yard when according to this statement Uncle Mos called him and he came towards you. Is that correct?

MR SHABALALA: I can say there is a mistake in this statement. That is a mistake in this statement. It does not connect to what I know in this statement. There is a mistake here that does not tie up with what I know.

CHAIRPERSON: What? Tell us that mistake?

MR SHABALALA: The mistake here in the statement is Bra Mos called Batandwa then that he was at the garden. That is not true. In fact Dandala it was he who went into that house and tried to get Batandwa. He then came out alone and then the deceased followed later. And he came into the car. There is a mistake in this part of the statement.

MR DILIZO: So was it your omission that again that you did not mention in this statement that Dandala proceeded into the house to call Batandwa?

MR SHABALALA: Yes in this statement I did not tell and that also he was at the garden it is not true.

CHAIRPERSON: I supposed the interpreter referred to the garden. In fact it should be an open area.

MR DILIZO: So according to you in your statement you had mentioned that Dandala had proceeded into the house to call Batandwa?

MR SHABALALA: Correct.

MR DILIZO: That it does not appear in this statement is it surprising you?

MR SHABALALA: It surprises me. It shows it was in my memory.

MR DILIZO: Mr Shabalala what could have caused this mistake with regard to the calling of Batandwa by Uncle Mos and this omission by you that Dandala proceeded into the house to call Batandwa?

MR SHABALALA: It may have been my memory. I could not remember that.

MR DILIZO: Yes I am interested in finding out what other contributions which could have lead to your memory being affected in these two aspects?

MR SHABALALA: For now I don't think there is anything that can disturb me.

MR DILIZO: So in other words you find yourself having been betrayed by your own memory with regard to these two aspects. Am I correct?

MR SHABALALA: When I made this statement I was in prison. I was frustrated during the time of this statement. I tried to give all of the truth in this statement. Most of what is written in this statement is true. I tried my best.

MR DILIZO: Meaning therefore that you were struggling with the reconstruction of the events within your own mind at the time you made this statement?

MR SHABALALA: I was not struggling a lot but I tried my best to recollect all of the happenings of that day.

MR DILIZO: Which therefore means that it was not a smooth running as you would have ordinarily expected to remember the events?

MR SHABALALA: I remembered even when I was recollecting these things. You see these people came for one day and they left that same day. They simply took this statement and left. But my recollection was okay.

MR DILIZO: Yes Mr Shabalala my point of emphasis is to find the cause or the justification of this omission and this error you have made in these two aspects. That is the whole point. Do you understand me.

MR SHABALALA: You see it is nearly it you see. The only thing I forgot is the one that I did not put correctly but most of the statement is nearly correct.

MR DILIZO: Seeing that Mr Shabalala you don't advance any tangible reason for this omission and this innocent mistake is it not possible that the same could apply with regard to the other aspects of your evidence as well as with regard to the contents of your statement?

MR SHABALALA: What I can say all of this happened a long time back but my memory does serve me well in relation to certain areas. It can of course happen that I could forgot this or that but my memory does indeed.

MR DILIZO: Do you remember when you made this statement appearing from page 75 to 79 of the bundle?

MR SHABALALA: Yes I see it.

MR DILIZO: He made this statement Mr Chairman that is appearing on page 75 to 79 of the bundle.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Shabalala can you remember the date when you made this statement?

MR SHABALALA: No I don't remember the dates.

MR DILIZO: Can you remember perhaps the year?

MR SHABALALA: Yes. 1997.

MR DILIZO: If Mr Shabalala you could make the unexplained mistakes in your statement in 1997 don't you expect that, that could be worsened with regard to the evidence you are giving before this Committee today with regard to your memory?

MR SHABALALA: No I don't think so.

MR DILIZO: Yes but I think that would be logical. If you could have made a mistake last year now almost a year from then it means the memory must have been affected further than it was affected at the time you made this statement.

CHAIRPERSON: Unless of course he has had the occasion subsequent to that to reflect on the events and think properly what happened.

MR DILIZO: Yes Mr Chairman but he hasn't stated so because my point is just to find the justification of his omission or the innocent mistake.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Shabalala what you are being asked here is this; in your statement you didn't mention that Inspector Dandala went to the house to call the deceased. What counsel wants to find out from you is what explanation if any do you have for that omission? Did you understand what you are being asked?

MR SHABALALA: Yes I follow the question.

CHAIRPERSON: In particular the focus is not so much on your evidence in chief but it is on the statement which you made I think on the 24th of April 1997 I think it is. Do you understand that? The one that you made whilst you were in Piet Retief prison. Do you understand that?

MR SHABALALA: Yes I do. What makes this statement not to have, that the fact that Mr Dandala went into the house my memory did show me that when we left that they told us about the car which we then tried to locate. In my mind I thought we had found Batandwa in the car in a certain house. That was a mistake with me because in my mind I thought when we left we followed the car according to this statement.

CHAIRPERSON: In other words your recollection of the events at the time when you made this statement was incorrect. Is that what you saying in regard to who went to the house to get the deceased out of the house?

MR SHABALALA: Yes that is how I put it.

CHAIRPERSON: Which was incorrect?

MR SHABALALA: It is not correct. It does not connect.

CHAIRPERSON: At a convenient time Mr Dilizo you will indicate so that we can take the tea adjournment.

MR DILIZO: Mr Chairman I think we can at this stage because I am coming to another aspect that is still within his statement.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS: .

ON RESUMPTION

CHAIRPERSON: We apologise for returning somewhat late. The legal representatives and the Committee had to discuss certain housekeeping matters. Mr Shabalala you are still under oath.

MBUSO ENOCK SHABALALA:: (s.u.o.)

MR DILIZO: Thank you Mr Chairman. One aspect on this aspect of your innocent mistake Mr Shabalala. Do you agree with me that it is possible that one may be betrayed by his memories despite how honest and bona fide one may be?

MR SHABALALA: (... no English translation)

MR DILIZO: I am saying one may be honest that the events happened as he thinks and you are certain about that only to find that despite that he is certain and honest but he is mistaken about them in his explanation. Would you agree with my view on that or not Mr Shabalala?

MR SHABALALA: Yes I agree with that.

MR DILIZO: Mr Shabalala in your statement on page 79 of the bundle you have stated that you were congratulated if I get Afrikaans very well by Adriaan Vlok. What was it about you were congratulated?

MR SHABALALA: It was not me alone who was being congratulated but all of us as a unit for work done.

MR DILIZO: Would Adriaan Vlok refer to the aspects for which he was praising you specially as a unit. For instance with regard to the successful arrest of the so-called terrorists or with success of some having been killed and so forth?

MR SHABALALA: Yes that was the case.

MR DILIZO: Both killing and the arrest?

MR SHABALALA: The killing, the arrest and the finding of weapons so it was.

MR DILIZO: Would that also invariably mean the death of Batandwa Ndondo? In other words (...intervention)

MR SHABALALA: I include that also.

MR DILIZO: Then when you appeared at Umtata Supreme Court were you remanded into custody or you were released?

MR SHABALALA: I was never detained.

MR DILIZO: You never paid any bail?

MR SHABALALA: No.

MR DILIZO: Nor were you ever detained for the death of Batandwa?

MR SHABALALA: No.

MR DILIZO: Would you say the reason it was because of the cover-ups that were perpetrated by your superiors or not?

MR SHABALALA: I can say as far as I know it was not a bad thing to them they did not see any brutality or such.

MR DILIZO: So meaning they approved of your actions concerning the death of Batandwa?

MR SHABALALA: I agree.

MR DILIZO: Because there was no disciplinary action having been taken against you amongst other things?

MR SHABALALA: Yes nothing happened.

MR DILIZO: So Shabalala I put it to you that however honest you might be it is possible that you have been betrayed here and there by your memory in remembering and narrating the events which occurred on that particular day. What would you say to that?

MR SHABALALA: Please repeat the question?

MR DILIZO: I am saying Mr Shabalala despite how honest you might have been in trying to remember the events of the date in question and how accurate you might have intended to be with your narration of the events but it is still possible that you were innocently betrayed by your own memory in the narration of the events.

MR SHABALALA: Correct.

MR DILIZO: And finally (...intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Do you agree with what counsel has put to you namely that it may well be that in relating the events to this Committee you may have made a mistake?

MR SHABALALA: No.

MR DILIZO: By saying no what do you mean Mr Shabalala?

MR SHABALALA: As I have come here I came here to give a true story of what happened as it was.

MR DILIZO: But Mr Shabalala you have made some mistakes on your statement how much more about the oral evidence you are giving and being asked questions impromptu. Can't you make a mistake too? An innocent one?

MR SHABALALA: I don't think I will make a mistake.

MR DILIZO: Despite that you have made it in your written statement? Is that what you are saying?

MR SHABALALA: It may happen but I don't think it will be as easy as that.

MR DILIZO: Finally, Mr Shabalala the cover-ups that is as they were perpetrated by your superiors and also reduced to writing in statements as well seen on the bundle could that not also have an effect in confusing your memory in trying to reconstruct the events in the proper perspective?

MR SHABALALA: I would not know about cover-ups because they are very far off from me. I can only tell about what I know. Whatever was a cover-up and was hidden I would not know about.

MR DILIZO: So I take it that you were not a party of any cover-ups which were intended to be introduced if any you could only find them having been introduced without knowing the author?

MR SHABALALA: No I was not part of any cover-ups.

MR DILIZO: So in other words plainly you agree with me that you were not a party and you would not have been consulted about them before they would be introduced in this Batandwa issue case?

MR SHABALALA: Yes I agree.

MR DILIZO: Thank you Mr Chairman no more questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR DILIZO: .

CHAIRPERSON: Yes thank you Mr Dilizo. Yes Mr Dukada?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR DUKADA: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Shabalala may I ask you a question which is very obvious. It is very clear that you seriously made amnesty. Is that correct?

MR SHABALALA: Correct.

MR DUKADA: And you find it is your duty to disclose the truth to this Committee in order to get amnesty?

MR SHABALALA: I agree.

MR DUKADA: And you know the risk of not disclosing the truth in this Committee?

MR SHABALALA: I know very well.

MR DUKADA: In other words if you are refused amnesty the Attorney General may charge you with the murder of Batandwa Ndondo.

MR SHABALALA: Yes I know.

MR DUKADA: I just want to start from just the end of your evidence in chief briefly and then I will come back and around the sequence of your evidence. How much salary were you earning in 1985?

MR SHABALALA: 1300 about there.

MR DUKADA: Was it a nett or a gross?

MR SHABALALA: It was before any subtractions could be made.

MR DUKADA: Yes then after deductions have been made how much were you left to take home?

MR SHABALALA: I would be left with R800.

MR DUKADA: Is my assumption correct that during 1985 you were a married with dependants?

MR SHABALALA: That is correct.

MR DUKADA: And how many children did you have?

MR SHABALALA: Two.

MR DUKADA: And you had a duty to provide maintenance to them?

MR SHABALALA: Yes it was my duty.

MR DUKADA: And I also assume that they were schooling and money was needed for school fees?

MR SHABALALA: Correct that is so.

MR DUKADA: And no doubt Mr Shabalala an amount of R800 was far low to cater for such expenses?

MR SHABALALA: Yes but I tried my best.

MR DUKADA: But you agree with me that you needed more money to shoulder that responsibility?

MR SHABALALA: Yes I needed more money that is true.

MR DUKADA: Desperately? You needed the money desperately?

MR SHABALALA: Not to the point where I would be forced to do whatever I did try to do by selling some things.

MR DUKADA: Now you have already indicated in your evidence that if you had captured an ANC or PAC cadre with weapons you will be rewarded by a sum of money and if you have killed you would also be rewarded the amount would vary. Is that correct?

MR SHABALALA: Correct.

MR DUKADA: So do you agree with me that if you had not killed Batandwa Ndondo on the 24th of September 1985 you would have received nothing?

MR SHABALALA: It was not money that I aimed for but we used to get an allowance when we went out on duty outside of the area or usual working area.

MR DUKADA: That is not my question Sir. My question to you is that do you agree with me that if you had not killed Batandwa Ndondo on the 24th of September 1985 you would have received nothing?

MR SHABALALA: No I would not have got that money.

MR DUKADA: So it was your wish that in your operation to Nxala you should get something?

MR SHABALALA: I can say when we go out into the country we used to get an allowance just for going out of the country. Besides hitting some one or getting something but we used to get money besides our salary.

MR DUKADA: Yes but what I am saying to you is that in your operation to Nxala on the 24th September 1985 you expected to get something in addition to your salary?

MR SHABALALA: It may have happened yes.

MR DUKADA: And surely you would have been a very unhappy man to go to Nxala come back without having seized any weapons without having killed Batandwa. Do you agree with me?

MR SHABALALA: No.

MR DUKADA: I don't understand the answer no. Can I repeat the question to you. The question to you is that you would have been a very unhappy man to come back from Nxala knowing that you would receive nothing?

CHAIRPERSON: ...(inaudible)

MR DUKADA: Sorry I am just trying to ask did you understand? What do you mean by no Mr Shabalala?

MR SHABALALA: What I mean if I ever had gone out and not found anything I would not have felt unhappy. Even if anything has happened or not I would not be happy or not. I would not be disappointed. I would just go on working.

MR DUKADA: But as I indicated to you earlier on you will be more happier to get something than getting nothing.

MR SHABALALA: I did say no.

MR DUKADA: Right Mr Shabalala I just want to take you to page 77 of the bundle. The third sentence from the bottom reads as follows

"We held a braai and drank to celebrate the success."

Do you understand that?

MR SHABALALA: We did have a braai at Barkley.

MR DUKADA: You had a braai and drinks to celebrate the success. The success means the killing of Batandwa Ndondo. Is that correct?

MR SHABALALA: I can say so yes.

MR DUKADA: And Mr Dandala was also present when you were celebrating?

MR SHABALALA: I cannot remember any longer whether they had left already or not. It was in the afternoon but I do not remember well now I don't know whether they were still around or had left already.

MR DUKADA: No Mr Shabalala this is very important. Please can you think whether Mr Dandala was there when you were drinking?

MR SHABALALA: I cannot tell but I don't know as to whether he was still around or not. I do know that their boss, the white man was still around. That is the person I can remember. They used to go and come back and so on. But I don't think they were still there. I do not remember as to whether they were still there. I don't know. I don't remember.

MR DUKADA: Mr Shabalala surely it was very unusual for other people like policemen to celebrate the death of another human being. Do you agree with me?

MR SHABALALA: Yes.

MR DUKADA: Did you enquire from the policeman why were you celebrating, the reason for the killing of Batandwa Ndondo?

MR SHABALALA: No I did not ask.

MR DUKADA: Did you not find it necessary to find out from your colleagues why now there is a braai for the killing of Batandwa Ndondo?

MR SHABALALA: As our leaders it became apparent that they did not see it as a mistake to them that is.

MR DUKADA: I am not asking you that. I am asking you during the course of your drinking and enjoying the meat did you ask why Ndondo was killed?

MR SHABALALA: No I did not ask.

MR DUKADA: Now Mr Shabalala surely you must know. If you really want amnesty in this Committee you must know why Ndondo was killed. You were given R500, you were congratulated, you were also having a braai and drinking. It is unusual. You must tell the Committee why Ndondo was killed. Please tell us?

MR SHABALALA: I can say Ndondo was the wanted person here in Transkei as we had been given the authorisation that we must go to Nxala he was the wanted person. It seems he was a dangerous person to the government as far as we were told. He was then found. Unfortunately he was killed.

MR DUKADA: Yes I know about that. You have already explained that. But what I want to find out from you; do you agree with me that on your very visit to Nxala on the 24th of September 1985 it had already been agreed that Ndondo should be killed?

MR SHABALALA: No I did not know that he had to be killed. I did not know.

MR DUKADA: But when you were having the braai were you surprised that you were congratulated and you had, it was a question of having meat and a celebration? Were you surprised by that?

MR SHABALALA: Yes I was surprised.

MR DUKADA: You see in your evidence you have already indicated that when you arrived at Barkley East from Vlakplaas you planned the Ndondo matter. Is that correct?

MR SHABALALA: Yes we did talk at length about it as the person was wanted.

MR DUKADA: Exactly Mr Shabalala please I am not trying to intimidate you at all. You need amnesty here. I just want to find out from you what was discussed about Ndondo? Because Ndondo could have been arrested by any policeman at Nxala in the security branch there. Please tell the Committee what was discussed at Barkley East about Ndondo?

MR SHABALALA: At Barkley East when we were told, the way we were told by the commanding officer of the Dandala group he told us that Ndondo was a dangerous person who is connecting with terrorists here in Transkei. Who is a dangerous person and others who had fought with the police. I don't know where it was. Those people had to be found. We were then showed his photograph and given direction where we could find him. It was Dandala who told us that we had to go to Nxala. We then went to Nxala. When we left it was not said that this is the only one who is supposed to be found. There were others, a list of others who too were wanted.

MR DUKADA: But now Mr Shabalala you are digressing to the point I am developing. On the very same day, 24th September after you had killed Batandwa you went back to Elliot and held a braai. You never looked for any other ANC or PAC operatives. Is that correct?

MR SHABALALA: The following month we proceeded and continued our work.

MR DUKADA: No Sir I am just talking about the 24th of September 1985. You have just said that on the day in question you were also looking for other terrorists. But now in your very same evidence you have indicated that after you killed Batandwa you went to Elliot and held a braai and celebrated.

MR SHABALALA: Yes.

MR DUKADA: And so on that day it was only Batandwa who was to be dealt with?

MR SHABALALA: It was not he alone who was supposed to be dealt with.

MR DUKADA: No but my question is that on that day it was only Batandwa who was dealt with?

MR SHABALALA: Yes that was the only work that we did on that day.

MR DUKADA: Now where you are seated right now and you are applying for amnesty in retrospect is it not clear to you now that the death of Batandwa was premeditated, was pre-planned?

MR SHABALALA: That it was planned no I would not know but I only heard as I had just explained it could be that our superiors had done such planning but we were not told that way.

MR DUKADA: Please Mr Shabalala you were not a human instrument you know. You are a trained former ANC cadre, you were co-opted in the South African police force. You know very well before you go to any operation you have to be briefed and told by your superiors what should happen. You were engaged in an extremely dangerous mission. That is to arrest a deadly terrorist according to you. Please tell the Committee what was discussed about Ndondo at Barkley East?

CHAIRPERSON: Do you mean in addition to what he has told us? Because we've asked him the question before and he has told us what was discussed.

MR DUKADA: Sorry Mr Chairman I am not satisfied with the answer furnished by the witness. I am insisting. I know that I am repeating the question but (...intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes I think if there is any matter that you believe he has omitted perhaps you should put it to him or whether canvas from him whether is that all. Mr Shabalala you have told us what you were told of and concerning the deceased at Barkley East? Namely that there were certain trained terrorists who were the enemies of the government presumably the government of the Transkei who were wanted by the government here and that these persons had to be captured right. Now what counsel wants to find out is in addition to that was anything discussed of and concerning the deceased?

MR SHABALALA: No whatever else that may have been discussed was that we must go on and search for the person.

MR DUKADA: Thank you Mr Chairman. Now when you say when you arrived at Barkley East you met a white man together with Dandala?

MR SHABALALA: (... no English translation)

MR DUKADA: Sorry Mr Shabalala I dismiss that. When you were at Barkley East not Elliot sorry, you met the white person and Dandala from the Transkeian police. Is that correct?

MR SHABALALA: When we got to Barkley East we met this white man and Dandala was present.

CHAIRPERSON: Was Dandala present?

MR SHABALALA: Dandala I think we split with him at Elliot if I am not mistaken.

CHAIRPERSON: No, no you are being asked about where did you meet Dandala. Was Dandala present at Barkley East? Is that where you met him? Did you meet Dandala at Barkley East at the beginning?

MR SHABALALA: Yes I met him at Barkley East first time.

MR DUKADA: Thank you Mr Chairman. And he gave you a list together with photographs of the so-called terrorists to be captured?

MR SHABALALA: I agree.

MR DUKADA: Was it not much more easier for the police at Nxala to simply go and arrest Batandwa from his home than travelling from Vlakplaas, Barkley East and to Nxala?

MR SHABALALA: In terms of what they explained to us they said it was easier for us because we know these people. We can identify those people unlike the policemen who may go and want and then search for these people. Sometimes they may meet this person and not identify this person. We are able to identify him as the correct one.

MR DUKADA: No Mr Shabalala, Batandwa Ndondo was at his own place of residence. He was known by people there. The police at Nxala would have simply enquired about his place of residence and trace him without any difficulty. Do you agree with me?

MR SHABALALA: I agree with you.

MR DUKADA: It was not a question of an ANC cadre who grow up in Transkei who had been in hiding in Soweto, a big place. Do you agree with me?

MR SHABALALA: I did not know. I did not know. Now you are telling me that it was a known person. I thought it was some one who was not known. Somebody who was hiding, who was dangerous to them. We did not know that it was a person they knew, thinking that it is some one they could not find. They included him in that list, the one they gave to us.

MR DUKADA: Do you think that Shosha was not aware that Ndondo's home was at Nxala?

MR SHABALALA: No Shosha it seems did not know because we were looking around. She did not know.

MR DUKADA: Now let us just come from the beginning of your evidence in chief now Mr Shabalala. What is your standard of education?

MR SHABALALA: Standard eight.

MR DUKADA: And what was your occupation before you left the country to join the ANC?

MR SHABALALA: I was a machine operator at ISCOR.

MR DUKADA: Did you belong to any political organisation at that time?

MR SHABALALA: No.

MR DUKADA: And obviously when you skipped the country you found that there was something inherently wrong with the Apartheid government in power then.

MR SHABALALA: No.

MR DUKADA: Then why did you skip the country?

MR SHABALALA: It was a friend of mine who took me to them saying that I am getting too little from ISCOR, being people who were trying to get work elsewhere.

MR DUKADA: Did you leave the country in order to get a more remunerative job or to join the ANC?

MR SHABALALA: You see where I stayed the ANC was not a known entity.

MR DUKADA: No but my question is that you have already indicated that you left the country. Now what I am asking you the reasons for leaving the country did you want to get a more remunerative job or to join the ANC?

MR SHABALALA: I wanted to get a better paying job not to join the ANC.

MR DUKADA: After having left the country did you ever join the ANC?

MR SHABALALA: I found myself in that problem.

CHAIRPERSON: What do you mean by saying that you found yourself in that problem? Did you join the ANC?

MR SHABALALA: What I can say is the ANC robbed me from the onset. This fellow I was moving with knew very well that I would not be coming back. I joined the ANC having been compelled because I was already outside of the country. I could not come back home.

MR DUKADA: Thank you Mr Chairman. Are you saying you were forced to join the ANC?

MR SHABALALA: Correct I think they also know it.

MR DUKADA: And then in your evidence you have already indicated that you stayed with the ANC for 4 years?

MR SHABALALA: Correct.

MR DUKADA: Are you also saying that you were forced to remain with the ANC for 4 years?

MR SHABALALA: I had no way. I could not make any chance.

MR DUKADA: Are you also saying Mr Shabalala that you were forced by the authorities of the ANC to remain with it for 4 years?

MR SHABALALA: Yes correct, that was so.

MR DUKADA: And yet it was easy for you to leave the ANC and come back home?

MR SHABALALA: That it became easy for me to run away was because I endured a lot of hardship until I left it.

MR DUKADA: And after the hardships you experienced with the ANC surely you became hostile to the ANC. Am I correct?

MR SHABALALA: No I did not hate it that much as to be hostile to it. No.

MR DUKADA: Did you like the organisation after you had left it and joined South Africa?

MR SHABALALA: No that was the time I had split with them trying to build my own life. Trying to live my life as I wanted.

MR DUKADA: Mr Shabalala the question is very simple to you. After having left the ANC and come back home did you like the ANC or did you hate the ANC?

MR SHABALALA: What I can say it was the same. I was not interested. I did not like or did not hate. I was not interested.

MR DUKADA: From you Mr Shabalala the impression I gained is that you are a person who has never had interest in politics. Am I correct?

MR SHABALALA: No I had no interest in politics.

MR DUKADA: And for you to go to exile and join the ANC it was just a hobby. Am I correct.

CHAIRPERSON: His evidence is that he left the country to go to Swaziland to look for a better paying job. It was only when he was outside the country that the conditions were such that he was compelled by those conditions to join the ANC. That doesn't suggest itself as being a hobby.

MR DUKADA: Sorry Mr Chairman to interrupt you. Thank you Mr Chairman. As I understand you, you as a person not having interest in politics at all you went to the ANC in order to get a better job and nothing else.

MR SHABALALA: No, nothing else.

MR DUKADA: And even when you joined Vlakplaas you wanted a better job and nothing else.

MR SHABALALA: Even then it was the same. I could not go this way or that way. I was compelled to join.

MR DUKADA: Yes Sir but what I am saying to you when you decided to come back home and join the South African Police you had no interest in politics at all. You wanted simply to get a better job.

MR SHABALALA: When I returned home, at my return home I thought I was going to stay home and not do the things that are going to disturb my spirit.

MR DUKADA: Yes Sir I appreciate your answer but more what I need from you is you left the country because you wanted a better job. You found that within the ANC you were experiencing difficulties you came back. You decided to join the South African Police. Now the question I am asking you when you decided to join the police force at Newcastle you wanted to get a better job but nothing else. You had no interest in South African politics.

MR SHABALALA: You see I was not interested in politics. I don't want to lie to you.

MR DUKADA: So if the South African Police force was paying you an adequate salary then you would not bother yourself about what was the policy of the South African Police force then.

MR SHABALALA: Can that question please be repeated?

MR DUKADA: If you were comfortable with the South African Police force receiving a salary you would not have interest at all about the politics of the country?

MR SHABALALA: I don't follow the question.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Dukada perhaps you should simplify the question because it is a complexed question in any event. Yes please?

MR DUKADA: Yes thank you Mr Chairman. Now if you are receiving the salary which was satisfying you in the South African Police force then you were comfortable. It is all that you wanted. Is that correct?

CHAIRPERSON: Are you putting to this witness that he was content with the salary that he was receiving with the South African - yes?

The question is as to whether your salary from the police force was satisfactory to you?

MR SHABALALA: Yes it was satisfactory to me.

MR DUKADA: Thank you Mr Chairman. And you had no interest of any other thing in the South African Police force?

MR SHABALALA: Interest?

MR DUKADA: Yes alright. The question may be vague to you. You had no interest in South African politics. All what you were satisfied with was the salary you were receiving in the police force?

MR SHABALALA: Yes to me that was the case. I just wanted to work for myself. That is what I wanted.

MR DUKADA: And you didn't join any political organisation or didn't have any interest in any other political discussions which were going on in the South African Police force?

MR SHABALALA: No I could not.

CHAIRPERSON: When you returned from exile I gather that you wandered to the SAP offices in Ermelo?

MR SHABALALA: Correct.

CHAIRPERSON: What was the purpose of going to the police in Ermelo?

MR SHABALALA: I was tired and I was some one wanted I knew.

CHAIRPERSON: So you went there to surrender yourself is that?

MR SHABALALA: Correct.

MR DUKADA: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Shabalala are you on good terms with Mr Dandala?

MR SHABALALA: I have no problem with him. I think we are on good terms.

MR DUKADA: And Mr de Kock?

MR SHABALALA: Even with him I have no problems with him.

MR DUKADA: Now when you joined Vlakplaas did you undergo any special training?

MR SHABALALA: No there was no training.

MR DUKADA: And you were receiving instructions time and again?

MR SHABALALA: Correct.

MR DUKADA: And as I understood your evidence yesterday Vlakplaas was a secret unit within the South African Police force.

MR SHABALALA: Correct.

MR DUKADA: And your identity as well as your activities as a unit were not supposed to be exposed to the public?

MR SHABALALA: Correct.

MR DUKADA: And when you went to Nxala to arrest Ndondo on that day you became exposed to the public during the shooting. Is that correct?

MR SHABALALA: Yes we were very public. The public could see us yes.

MR DUKADA: And you even went to the police station to make a statement is that correct?

MR SHABALALA: Yes we did. At the police station to make a statement I did not go into the police station but we did go to the police station. As I say as to I am not certain whether it was a police station or not. We did go there. But as to whether a statement was made or not I do not know.

MR DUKADA: But what I am saying ultimately you became exposed because you made statements and your names became known to the people. Is that correct?

MR SHABALALA: Your question?

MR DUKADA: The question is; after you had made statements to the police at Nxala it doesn't matter when, your identity became exposed. Is that correct?

CHAIRPERSON: I didn't understand him to say that he made a statement to the police at Nxala. Perhaps you should first canvas that. Did you make a statement?

MR SHABALALA: No I never made a statement.

MR DUKADA: Now Mr Shabalala I come back to that very aspect because my impression from the cross-examination by Mr Hugo you said when the statement was referred to you: "This is not the statement I made at Nxala." But I will pass that at this stage. The Vlakplaas activities were highly secretive as you indicated. Is that correct?

MR SHABALALA: Yes.

MR DUKADA: And the reason why the Vlakplaas activities were highly secretive is because some of the things you were doing were unlawful. Is that correct?

MR SHABALALA: I don't know that.

MR DUKADA: What I am saying is that you were not following the ordinary police procedures the way you were functioning?

MR SHABALALA: No we used the ordinary police procedure.

MR DUKADA: But now in your application for amnesty, Exhibit E you are talking about abduction of Ndondo. Let us read it to you paragraph 10a of Exhibit E. You say Batandwa Ndondo - first have the statement before you Mr Shabalala so that you have a good memory. You say that Batandwa Ndondo was suspected of being an ANC terrorist. He was to be abducted.

CHAIRPERSON: That is Exhibit E, is that right? Yes indeed.

MR DUKADA: That is correct Mr Chairman. Let us read it back to you again before the interpretation is delivered to you. 10a you say

" Batandwa Ndondo was suspected of being an ANC terrorist. He was to be abducted and brought back to the Republic of South Africa for interrogation and possible recruitment as an askaris."

Do you see that?

MR SHABALALA: Yes I see it.

MR DUKADA: Here you are talking about abduction not an arrest which would be carried out by an ordinary policeman.

MR SHABALALA: Yes.

MR DUKADA: Now it goes back to the earlier point Mr Shabalala that after having killed a person who was defenceless you were given R500. It shows that your activities at Vlakplaas were unlawful. Do you agree with me?

MR SHABALALA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: The fact that he was given R500 shows that his activities were unlawful.

MR DUKADA: That is what I am putting here to the witness Mr Chairperson.

MR DUKADA: So you were aware about certain unlawful activities which were taking place at Vlakplaas?

MR SHABALALA: No I don't have any knowledge.

MR DUKADA: Was this incident the first one to be known to you as a one off one?

MR SHABALALA: I mean this was the first incident I got to know about.

MR DUKADA: Right. Can you turn to page 71 of the bundle? Mr Chairman it is this last sentence. I will just give the English versions of the Afrikaans statement.

You say there: -

"During 1985 I cannot remember the precise date Captain Eugene de Kock gave my group an order to operate in Transkei. Our instructions were anti-terrorism and to search for unlicensed firearms and vehicles."

Do you see that? Do you agree with me that, that is what you said in your statement?

MR SHABALALA: Yes I agree with that.

MR DUKADA: Can you tell the Committee who composed this group which went to Transkei?

MR SHABALALA: I may not remember others but others I can and may be able to give their names. Myself, Captain Mos, Noma Shosha, Beki, James.

CHAIRPERSON: Beki?

MR SHABALALA: Beki yes.

CHAIRPERSON: What was his surname?

MR SHABALALA: I do not know their surnames. James, Dubase is the surname, I do not know his name. That is the group of names I can remember.

MR DUKADA: Now if you can again turn to page 49 of the bundle? There at paragraph 30 you say

"A large contingent of Vlakplaas members went down to the Transkei amongst others Captain du Plessis, a person known to be as Adjutant Snor, Captain Mos, a female askaris by the name of Shosha, myself and several other askaris."

Are you referring to the same incident?

MR SHABALALA: Yes. When we came this way but when we had to go one kombi went with others and the other leaving with others.

MR DUKADA: Yes Sir but you were going to Transkei to conduct operations there.

MR SHABALALA: Yes we were coming this way. We came this way.

MR DUKADA: Was it something common to leave Vlakplaas and come down to Transkei and conduct operations?

MR SHABALALA: No it was not common. It was the first time for us to come this way to come and work. We usually work that other side.

MR DUKADA: Are you saying that in 1985 as a Vlakplaas unit it was your first occasion to come and operate in Transkei?

MR SHABALALA: Yes to me it was the first time to come this side.

MR DUKADA: And your operation became known to members of the security branch generally before you could even arrive in Transkei. Is that correct?

MR SHABALALA: Can you please repeat that question?

MR DUKADA: My question to you Mr Shabalala is that was your arrival to Transkei known to the Transkeian police before you could even come?

MR SHABALALA: I think we were known and we were expected because when we got here we got a white man who came with Dandala and others. We were expected, they knew in advance that we were coming.

MR DUKADA: Would you say that the top management of the Transkeian police knew about your coming to Transkei?

MR SHABALALA: I did not know there was a place where we were supposed to go and stay and I would not know other things.

CHAIRPERSON: And in addition you met security branch police officers from the Transkei.

MR SHABALALA: It was Dandala and this white man and there were three people since who were waiting for us.

CHAIRPERSON: Counsel wants to find out is from your own knowledge do you know whether the top management of the security branch in the Transkei was aware of your visit?

MR SHABALALA: No I did not know as to whether they knew.

MR DUKADA: Thank you Mr Chairman. And before you came for this operation of Ndondo have you been to Transkei before and conducted anti-terrorism operations?

MR SHABALALA: No this was my first time.

MR DUKADA: Now on the 23rd of September 1985, that is the day before the killing of Batandwa Ndondo had you been to security branch offices in Umtata with Shosha and Bra Mos?

MR SHABALALA: I do not know. I can't remember any more.

MR DUKADA: You see Mr Shabalala there is something which I am getting confused with the trend of the evidence given by you and Mr Dandala. At page 8 of the bundle paragraph 9 he says that

"On the 23rd September 1985 he was called upon by Colonel Booi who assigned me to go for a special duty at Barkley East to assist members of the civilian South African Police. He informed me that Constable Booi was already at Barkley East. I could not refuse the assignment because in terms of the police standing orders it is a misconduct for a policeman to disobey the instructions from a superior."

Then at paragraph 10 he says: -

" Accordingly I packed my clothes on the same day and went to head office where I met Bra Mos, Eric Shabalala and a lot of people in two kombis. I boarded one of the kombis and we proceeded to Barkley East."

MR SHABALALA: I never met a person called Colonel Booi. I do not know him.

CHAIRPERSON: The point that is being made here is that according to Dandala he met you at the head office and then from the head office all of you then proceeded to Barkley East and we assume the head office referred to here is Umtata. So what counsel wants to find out is; did you go to Umtata as suggested by Dandala in his statement?

MR SHABALALA: No I never went to Umtata.

MR DUKADA: Thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Now when you are moving onto a new point will you indicate so that we can take the lunch adjournment.

MR DUKADA: Thank you Mr Chairman I was just about to get to another point. We can adjourn Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Shall we take the adjournment now and then we can come ...(inaudible)

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS: .

ON RESUMPTION

CHAIRPERSON: ... you are still under oath. Yes Mr Dukada.

MBUSO ENOCK SHABALALA: (s.u.o.)

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR DUKADA: (cont)

Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Shabalala when you left Barkley East for Nxala it was yourself, Bra Mos, Shosha and Dandala. Is that correct?

MR SHABALALA: Correct.

MR DUKADA: And Dandala was also part of the planning which took place at Barkley East about the arrest of Ndondo?

MR SHABALALA: Correct.

MR DUKADA: And did anybody threaten Dandala to be part of the group to go to Nxala and there arrest Ndondo?

MR SHABALALA: No I don't remember. I don't think there is anybody who threatened him.

MR DUKADA: In fact if I am getting evidence clearly he was with this white person and produced to you the photographs and the list of people to be looked after.

MR SHABALALA: Can you please repeat the question?

MR DUKADA: In fact Dandala and the white gentleman you met at Barkley East offered you the list and photographs of the so-called terrorists which were being looked after in Transkei?

MR SHABALALA: Correct.

MR DUKADA: And Dandala knew about the list and photographs.

MR SHABALALA: He must have known of those photographs and list because he was moving with that white man.

CHAIRPERSON: Well apart from the fact that Dandala was with the white man you have just described do you have any other basis for saying that he must have known about the photographs?

MR SHABALALA: No I would not be having any other basis why (...indistinct) he had knowledge.

MR DUKADA: Thank you Mr Chairman. Now did you have some handcuffs on your way to Nxala to assist you in (...intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: ...(inaudible) answers that question. Mr Dandala told us that at some point during the journey to Nxala he enquired whether everyone who was in the motor vehicle was a police officer. Did that happen?

MR SHABALALA: I do not remember.

CHAIRPERSON: When you say you cannot recall could it have happened?

MR SHABALALA: (... no English translation)

CHAIRPERSON: Were you at any stage introduced to Mr Dandala?

MR SHABALALA: When they got to Barkley East they introduced us to him.

CHAIRPERSON: How were you introduced to Dandala and the other police officer from the Transkei?

MR SHABALALA: When he was introduced to us as a security officer from Transkei who was going to assist us in here in Transkei.

CHAIRPERSON: Was Dandala notified about who you are at the same time?

MR SHABALALA: No he was not told. No he was not told.

CHAIRPERSON: Well he further told us that during the journey to Nxala the askaris who were present in the motor vehicle told him how they operate and amongst other things they told him that if they go on an operation with an individual and that individual does not take part in that particular operation they would come back and kill that individual.

MR SHABALALA: No I don't agree with that. I did not hear such conversation.

CHAIRPERSON: By the way Dandala was sitting in front of you was he? At a seat in front of you?

MR SHABALALA: Correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR DUKADA: Thank you Mr Chairman. And when you were proceeding towards Nxala is it correct that you had some handcuffs to assist you in arresting or in capturing Ndondo?

MR SHABALALA: Yes there were handcuffs.

MR DUKADA: And you arrived at Ntsebenza's home where Batandwa was and as you have explained already he after certain discussions got into the minibus.

MR SHABALALA: Correct.

MR DUKADA: And did you handcuff him?

MR SHABALALA: No we did not.

MR DUKADA: Did you tell him that he was being arrested?

MR SHABALALA: That we told him that he was under arrest I don't think we did tell him such a thing.

MR DUKADA: It is because you were not going there to arrest him but to abduct him. Is that correct?

MR SHABALALA: Correct.

MR DUKADA: And in fact you abducted him and drove away. Is that correct?

MR SHABALALA: Yes he got into the car and we proceeded with him.

MR DUKADA: Mr Dandala has explained to this Committee that the distance between - you know when you are from the place of Ndondo proceeding to the spot where the shooting occurred you first past the police station. Is that correct?

MR SHABALALA: Because I do not know the area I would not know that there was a police station in that vicinity. I do not know. As the person who knew the place I did not know the police station of the area.

MR DUKADA: Yes but according to the evidence of Dandala the distance between the place where Batandwa was abducted and the police station was about a half a kilometre. You cannot dispute that.

MR SHABALALA: No I cannot dispute that. Because as we were moving we did not move a long distance before we got there.

MR DUKADA: Yes now if you cannot dispute that will you tell the Committee what actually took place after Ndondo had climbed into the minibus?

MR SHABALALA: After he entered the kombi and having closed the door it is then Bra Mos asked Dandala to take his ID out and show him. Which he did and showed. After that Bra Mos proceeded talking to the deceased that there is something he wants discussed with him. After that Thandi who was next to Bra Mos turned around and faced the deceased asking him as to whether he, the deceased still remembered the female. After the deceased saw the lady that is when the deceased became panicky and tried to escape through the window. As he was trying to escape through the window. As he was trying to escape through the window we tried to grab him because his upper body was outside and we could only hold his legs. At that time the car was in motion but it was not fast. We held him tight but all of the upper body was outside. At the time he was struggling until he slipped from our hands and fell out. That is when Bra Mos stopped the car and Bra Mos jumped out of the car and tried to chase him. At the time I too tried to open my door from the outside as it was not able to open from the inside and followed Bra Mos while Bra Mos was still shooting.

MR DUKADA: Mr Shabalala I didn't want to interrupt you. I am not interested about that stage. Mr Dandala's evidence is that from the premises where Batandwa was fetched to the police station, that is before you could even reach the spot where he was shot and killed the distance is about half a kilometre. Now what I want to find out what was being discussed? Because according to the evidence of Dandala the production of the police certificate by him was after you had left the police station next to Nxala prison. Now what I am trying to ask from you what was being discussed the distance of this half a kilometre between the residence of Ndondo and the police station?

MR SHABALALA: There was no discussion that we had with him except to ask for Dandala to produce the certificate. At that time the car is in motion. Dandala issuing that ID, the car is in motion. There was no discussion of any sort. A discussion according to Bra Mos was supposed to take place later but the car is in motion all the time. When Shosha turned back and said: "Do you still remember me?" The car is in motion all of there. And he then tried to escape. No discussion took place. Not even a small one.

MR DUKADA: Now, now Mr Shabalala I do understand. I know the incident took place a long time ago. But let me repeat. According to Dandala the distance from the place where Ndondo was fetched to the police station was about half a kilometre and from the police station to the spot where he was killed the distance of about 150 metres. Do you get the point? Now (...intervention)

MR SHABALALA: I hear you but there was no discussion. There was no discussion. No discussion took place.

MR DUKADA: Are you saying for about half a kilometre nothing was discussed between yourselves and Ndondo?

CHAIRPERSON: I think that is the input of his answer.

MR DUKADA: Thank you Mr Chairman. So for the distance of about half a kilometre you remained quiet until the stage that Bra Mos called upon you to furnish the police certificate?

CHAIRPERSON: You see the difficulty Mr Dukada is that you are putting to this witness as a fact that the evidence of Dandala. He does not know the area and is not in a position to indicate how long that distance was. All he is saying as far as he recalls is that as the kombi was moving you know Bra Mos introduced himself as the police officer, asked Dandala to produce his appointment certificate which was done. And then Shosha turned back and said: "Do you still remember me?" That is all that happened.

MR DUKADA: Thank you Mr Chairman. Let me just put (...intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: I understand your difficulty but unfortunately I don't think you can take it any further.

MR DUKADA: Thank you Mr Chairman I take the point. Surely Mr Shabalala before Batandwa escaped from the minibus there was an argument. Do you agree with me?

MR SHABALALA: No there was no squabble or such misunderstandings as far as I am concerned.

MR DUKADA: In your statement at page 75 of the bundle I just will render and English translation of what I want to ask you. You say after Shosha had identified herself to Ndondo and you say in your statement

"Batandwa got a fright and jumped out and asked what was going on now."

You see this sentence there can you just read it in Afrikaans without wasting time. Page 75 the second paragraph and it should be the second sentence of this sentence.

"Batandwa got a fright, jumped up and asked what is going on now?"

Do you see that?

MR SHABALALA: I can see there that is what happened that there was an argument or a quarrel there was none. I dispute that there was a quarrel or an argument in the car. No such thing occurred.

MR DUKADA: Yes Sir but what I am saying is that he demanded to know what was happening. Is that correct?

MR SHABALALA: Correct. At that time he was jumping we could not wait, we did not wait.

MR DUKADA: Now if you wanted to facilitate the abduction do you not think it was wise for you to simply handcuff him to frustrate any possible resistance like running away?

MR SHABALALA: You see the time was too short before we could tell him. Even if we could do that the time was too short for us to try and handcuff him.

MR DUKADA: No just before you could even move the vehicle after he had climbed in was it not wise for you if at all you wanted to abduct him, I mean if you wanted to kill him was it not more appropriate to handcuff him to frustrate any possible resistance?

MR SHABALALA: What I can say is that the car was being driven away by the captain and he was then ordering the policeman we were moving with that he must introduce himself to this man. Before we could do any other thing we had to tell him that we are these people. Because after that, after he had introduced himself it happened that he faced Shosha and after that he went out, tried to run away.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Shabalala if you can just be careful not to bang the thing. It is very sensitive.

MR DUKADA: Thank you Mr Chairman. That is precisely my question Mr Shabalala was it not in order to frustrate any possible escape by Ndondo, to avoid any unnecessary shooting and chasing him was it not more appropriate in the circumstances to handcuff him before you could even drive away from his home?

MR SHABALALA: The car was already in motion and Bra Mos had already started driving. And during the time he was introduced that we are policemen and all of that during that time the car was in motion because after he entered the car there was no time to wait and to go on. We just proceeded with him.

MR DUKADA: Now don't you find it strange Mr Shabalala that the very dangerous person you have described, a terrorist you went to his house, you don't conduct any search. You don't search his body. He climbed into the vehicle and thirdly you don't handcuff him at all. Don't you find that you are very, very careless if at all? I should say you were careless.

MR SHABALALA: I can say it is as it has happened because it is the captain who drove off. He would have been the one to tell us that we must search and so on. That could not then happen.

MR DUKADA: And the obvious question is that if he had been handcuffed definitely he would not have escaped at all. Do you agree with me?

MR SHABALALA: Yes he would not have been able to escape.

MR DUKADA: Now you see Mr Shabalala you see the reason why Batandwa was not handcuffed. Let me start with your Exhibit E before I put this point to you. Your Exhibit E 10.a you say there

"Batandwa Ndondo was suspected of being an ANC terrorist he was to be abducted and brought back to the Republic of South Africa for interrogation and possible recruitment as an askaris."

When Batandwa after he had climbed into the kombi you second him to be an askaris and he was refusing?

CHAIRPERSON: Are you putting that to this witness as a fact? Is there going to be the evidence to that effect?

MR DUKADA: ...(inaudible)

CHAIRPERSON: Well perhaps you should indicate because otherwise if you put it as a fact you know that is a different.

MR DUKADA: I am sorry Mr Chairman let me just rephrase the question Mr Chairman. I don't want to mislead the witness because there will be no evidence to prove this. So I take the point Mr Chairman. The point I am putting to you Mr Shabalala is that the deceased was deliberately not handcuffed in order to create an opportunity for him to escape and after having escaped from the kombi you shot him in order to justify the escape.

MR SHABALALA: No that was not the case.

MR DUKADA: Now if you can turn at page 50 of the bundle.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes I understand let's just put the other proposition that you want to put to this witness. I think probably you should put it at the level of saying it would be argued that as I understand the position that you will argue that on a probability there was an argue in the motor vehicle with the deceased refusing to be recruited as an askaris which lead to his killing. Is that going to be your argument?

MR DUKADA: ...(inaudible)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes I think you should.

CHAIRPERSON TO THE WITNESS: You see what counsel is saying is that he is going to present argument to this Committee to the effect that in the motor vehicle there was an argument between the askaris and the deceased over the refusal by the deceased to become an askaris and that is the reason why it was decided he must be killed.

Does that accurately reflect the proposition that you want to put to the witness?

MR DUKADA: Yes Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you understand that? Do you want me to repeat that?

MR SHABALALA: I understand it but it is not so. Indeed it is far-fetched.

MR DUKADA: Thank you Mr Chairman. In your evidence you have already indicated that you would capture the so-called terrorist, recruit him to be an askaris or arrest him and hand over to the police for prosecution. Is that correct?

MR SHABALALA: Yes that was to be.

MR DUKADA: Did you have a mandate to kill any ANC cadre or PAC cadre from Colonel de Kock?

MR SHABALALA: Never.

MR DUKADA: What did you say?

MR SHABALALA: It never happened.

MR DUKADA: No you don't understand my question Mr Shabalala. My question is; did you have a mandate from any of your superiors including Colonel de Kock to kill ANC or PAC cadres?

MR SHABALALA: No.

MR DUKADA: Then if you turn to Exhibit E paragraph 10.a I will not read the first sentence which I have been reading time and again during the course of my examination. The second sentence reads as follows, it is the fourth page Mr Chairman of Exhibit E, paragraph 10.a. The second sentence reads

"When he escaped it was necessary to kill him as he knew the identity of an askaris, Noma Shosha with whom he had received military training in Lesotho as she was part of the team that abducted him."

Do you see that?

MR SHABALALA: Can that please be repeated again?

MR DUKADA: "When he escaped it was necessary to kill him as he knew the identity of an askaris, Noma Shosha with whom he had received military training in Lesotho as she was part of the team that abducted him."

MR SHABALALA: I do not then get what the question is.

CHAIRPERSON: You see in paragraph 10.a of your application for amnesty you said the following. When the deceased escaped it was necessary to kill him because he knew the identity of Noma Shosha with whom he had received military training in Lesotho as she was part of the team that abducted him. What you are saying here is that he was killed because he had become aware, he could identify Noma Shosha. That is what you said in your statement in your application. Did you say that in your statement I think in the first place?

MR SHABALALA: Maybe I did not put it the way I wanted to put it. The way I wanted to put it as it sounds now it sounds very strange to me.

CHAIRPERSON: Well what did you want to say?

MR SHABALALA: I said it happened that he was shot and got killed not because there was an aim that he must be killed. If he could be shot and killed that was to be but if he was shot and not killed that was again another case. As to I do not understand the question as to whether if he identified Noma Shosha what would then happen. But the aim was not to kill him when we were shooting him but that is what happened.

CHAIRPERSON: You see the question is; in your application for amnesty you wrote that at the time when the deceased tried to escape it was necessary that he be killed because he had identified Noma Shosha with whom he had gone to undergo military training in Lesotho.

MR SHABALALA: Yes I follow that.

CHAIRPERSON: The question of the legal representative is that you said that?

MR SHABALALA: Yes I did do that. I remember saying it.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you remember it as it stands?

MR SHABALALA: It sounded in another fashion. It sounds very strange to me.

CHAIRPERSON: That it sounds in a strange fashion is something else. But what is written on here is it what you said? What is the answer?

MR SHABALALA: In my reply to this question I put this question as to how it happened that he got killed or shot. Bra Mos shot because this would have happened with Noma Shosha that is how I put it. The reason why this person was shot or Bra Mos took the decision to shoot him, the deceased is because he thought of Shosha. That is how I put it.

MR DUKADA: Thank you Mr Chairman. This is a sworn statement Mr Shabalala. You took an oath before a Commissioner of Oaths before you signed it. Is that correct?

MR SHABALALA: Correct.

MR DUKADA: And it is the basis for your application for amnesty. Do you agree with me?

MR SHABALALA: That is so.

MR DUKADA: Are you realising now that what is contained here is inaccurate?

MR SHABALALA: But the better part of the statement I think and I hope that it is true. That most of what is written on it. It may happen that there is a mistake but there is no untruth as far as I know it must be mistakes only not untruths.

MR DUKADA: Now can you turn to page 57 of the bundle? I am just interested in the hand-written portion of paragraph b the second sentence. There you say

"We took orders and executed them. We were assigned a specific mission which we had to accomplish."

Do you get that?

MR SHABALALA: I would like you to read it again because there are sections that I cannot see them.

MR DUKADA: Page 57 of the bundle, paragraph b at the top the second sentence in the hand-written portion

"We took orders and executed them. We were assigned a specific mission which we had to accomplish."

Do you get that?

MR SHABALALA: I do.

MR DUKADA: And that portion is correct. It is what you intended to say in your application for amnesty?

MR SHABALALA: Here I was explaining about my job that at Vlakplaas this is what happened. I was just explaining.

MR DUKADA: Mr Shabalala what I was saying is what was written here as it is, is what you intended to say.

MR SHABALALA: I do not know what you want to suggest with your question.

MR DUKADA: In your application for amnesty you had to complete certain portions which are provided in the official application form and now the paragraphs, the two sentences that I have just read at page 57 paragraph b where you say you took orders and executed them because you had accomplish a specific mission. What I am asking you is that statement correct?

MR SHABALALA: It is as it stands, yes it is correct.

MR DUKADA: Who gave you orders?

MR SHABALALA: We got our instructions from our seniors as those who were ordering us our seniors would then explain everything after they having got orders from those who were above them.

MR DUKADA: And in this case what were the specific orders to you about Ndondo?

MR SHABALALA: As I have said there was no instruction. Whatever orders we got we got at Barkley East. What we were told was that such and such a person, they told us that there are the following people who are supposed to be arrested and their photographs were shown to us. The situation of Nxala we only got from Barkley East. This was not explained to us in Vlakplaas.

MR DUKADA: It doesn't matter Mr Shabalala where you got the orders. What I am asking you what orders did you receive about Ndondo?

MR SHABALALA: That Ndondo had to be arrested as I have explained and be handed over to the police or Captain Mos would take a decision as to what must happen as the officer commanding. And also the Transkeian police was there who could then decide with Captain Mos. I was a subordinate. It is they who could decide, that is Mos and Dandala as the policeman who was from Transkei. I was supposed to listen to them as to what must be done and I would then comply.

MR DUKADA: So there was no specific instruction that you should kill Ndondo?

MR SHABALALA: No there was no such instruction.

MR DUKADA: And just coming back again to Exhibit E at paragraph 10.a in brackets. According to you even the very first sentence is inaccurate. Let me read it. You said

"Batandwa was suspected of being an ANC terrorist. He was to be abducted and brought back to the Republic of South Africa for interrogation and possible recruitment as an askaris."

That again is inaccurate because your evidence is that you were to be told by Bra Mos what had to be done about Batandwa Ndondo. Is that correct?

MR SHABALALA: Correct.

MR DUKADA: Now obviously from what you have said to this Committee the killing of Ndondo was not part of your orders or instruction? Is that correct?

MR SHABALALA: No there was no such instruction.

MR DUKADA: And it was inaccurate in your application for amnesty to say that you were carrying out orders to kill Ndondo?

MR KNIGHT: Mr Chairman could I just request that the question be more specific as to what stage. Because the evidence has always been that there was never an initial instruction but that he followed orders at the time. To say that you had no orders is a misleading because the sequence (...intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: I understood the question to refer to the initial stage because the evidence of this witness certainly is that at the time when he ran away Bra Mos issued an instruction that they should shoot at the deceased.

MR KNIGHT: Yes that is my understanding but I think the question was not specific as to what stage and I was just requesting that it would be made specific as it pleases Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: ...(inaudible)

MR DUKADA: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Shabalala I am not trying to confuse you. When I talk about orders or instructions I am referring to the stage of the planning. That is before the killing of Ndondo.

MR SHABALALA: The planning of his death as I said I did not know about who planned. I did not hear about any planning of the ultimate killing of Ndondo that happened then.

MR DUKADA: Now at page 57 at that paragraph b when you say "we took orders and executed them," are you referring to what was said by Bra Mos during the stage of shooting?

MR SHABALALA: Because he had started shooting it said we must shoot in order to recapture him. Because there was no way we could re-arrest him. When he shot and I followed suit, I shot too.

MR DUKADA: Mr Shabalala can I ask one thing from you. Why are you applying for amnesty?

MR SHABALALA: My reason you see firstly as I was here in Transkei I saw that all of this happened during my employ. I did not simply take a decision from Pretoria to come and kill a person here. It was in the line of my work.

MR DUKADA: Now can you turn to page 50 of the bundle? Page 50 I am interested in paragraph 40. There you say paragraph 40

"Captain Mos then got out of the Kombi and immediately started shooting at Batandwa. Shosha followed and also began shooting at Batandwa. The Transkeian policeman and I also got out of the vehicle and also shot at Batandwa."

Do you get that?

MR SHABALALA: Yes I do.

MR DUKADA: Is that what you are still saying before this Committee?

MR SHABALALA: No I don't say so. Shosha did not exit the car. It was Bra Mos, myself and then the Transkeian police. Shosha did not leave the car. She only left the car after we had already captured the man, taken him back to the car.

MR DUKADA: Mr Shabalala did you understand the question?

MR SHABALALA: Please repeat it I did not hear it?

MR DUKADA: The question to you is; is what is contained in paragraph 40 of your affidavit correct?

CHAIRPERSON: ...(inaudible) answered and said that the sentence which says: "Shosha followed and also began shooting at Batandwa," is not correct. It is a mistake. Because Shosha did not leave the motor vehicle until after they had returned with the deceased to the motor vehicle.

MR DUKADA: Yes thank you Mr Chairman. Can I just clarify that with witness if the Committee could bear with me. In other words Mr Shabalala are you saying that Shosha never fired at the deceased?

MR SHABALALA: No she did not even fire anything. It is the three of us who shot at the deceased. Shosha did not take out her gun. She was holding the iron cuffs and she also had a small pen knife. I don't know what she was doing with that knife.

MR DUKADA: You see Mr Shabalala according to the doctor's post mortem report amongst the injuries the deceased sustained were three bullets wounds which were fired on the front body of the deceased. In other words it appears that the assailant was facing the deceased at the time the shots were fired.

MR SHABALALA: I don't remember. I remember him facing us with his back going that way.

MR DUKADA: Yes but what I am saying that is what is said by the doctor. In fact Mr Shabalala just to be brief on this aspect of the injuries the deceased sustained 15 bullet wounds according to the doctor. Of course some of them are exit wounds and some of them are entry wounds. But he says he sustained 8 bullet wounds, that is entry wounds and 1 of them was lost in the body. Can you explain how he sustained all these bullet wounds?

MR SHABALALA: I can say it could be that way because we were shooting. There were three guns there shooting. There were three guns used in the shoot out. I was holding a 9mm, Uncle Mos an HMC, Dandala also holding a 9mm. So all of those guns had bullets that were not equally big or long. So in the process of shooting all of these guns were blazing away whilst we were following him.

MR DUKADA: In fact this was a shooting to kill not to recapture the deceased. Do you agree with me?

MR SHABALALA: You see there the way he was being shot it could have happened that he was going to be killed. But our intention was to stop him. It happened that he did not stop running away. We then continued shooting until he fell.

MR DUKADA: If your intentions was to recapture him why did you not fire a warning shot to alert him about the danger of escaping from lawful custody?

MR SHABALALA: It so happened that Bra Mos had already started shooting. We also went out and he had continued running. Clearly he had heard that a shot had been fired but he did not stop running and so we had to also go on shooting running after him all the while.

MR DUKADA: No what I am asking even if I know you are not Bra Mos, you are not the first one to fire a shot do you agree with me that in the circumstances it was appropriate to first give the deceased a warning shot? I am talking to a trained policeman now.

MR SHABALALA: I agree with you there.

MR DUKADA: And that was not done?

MR SHABALALA: That the first shot I do not know whether it was a warning shot or it was targeted to the deceased. He was the one who shot first time. I don't know what he did. But he went on running. He was not stopping to run until he got killed by the following shots when we also took part in the shooting.

MR DUKADA: And Mr Shabalala the shooting was taking place at a very short range according to Dandala. Do you agree with that?

MR SHABALALA: No I do not agree with him.

MR DUKADA: And at what distance would you estimate when the first shot was fired by Bra Mos?

MR SHABALALA: I can say the distance could be 10 metres from Bra Mos - no not 10. 10 to 15 metres from Mos that is the distance he was away. But when he started shooting I would not know what the distance was. But when we alighted from the car Bra Mos was continuing shooting and that person was about 15 metres away.

MR DUKADA: And the deceased as you knew him that day he was a very heavy, a fat man. He was far from being an athlete. Do you agree with me?

MR SHABALALA: But as far as I could see he was running very fast and he was out-running us.

MR DUKADA: Lastly, Mr Shabalala don't you find it strange that your companion Dandala comes here without a grudge against you, gives evidence to say that you fired at the deceased when he was already lying on the ground until the magazine was empty. Thereafter you removed the empty magazine, re-loaded and continued firing whilst the deceased was laying on the ground. Don't you find that very, very strange for you companion to say that here?

MR SHABALALA: With that part of the story that did not happen. That did not happen. I dispute that.

MR DUKADA: And you have no reason to suggest why he is falsely implicating you here?

MR SHABALALA: No I can only say that is not true. There are turns on our part to take the deceased whilst he was still alive to try and get assistance and get information from he. We did not try and kill him because we knew that he was already defeated. We just wanted to get information as long as he was alive.

MR DUKADA: That doesn't answer my question. The question is that you have no reason to suggest to this Committee why would Dandala falsely implicate you or why would Dandala say that you continued firing?

MR SHABALALA: There I would not know perhaps that is how he saw that he would save himself by saying that perhaps he shot only once. I don't know whether he was trying to save his own skin. I cannot explain.

MR DUKADA: And Mr Shabalala I will suggest in the stage of argument to this Committee that you were a member of a hit squad. You were assigned to go and kill the deceased and nothing else. What do you say to that?

MR SHABALALA: I will say I was a member of the security police. That I was a hit squad sent to do that, that is not what was told to me. I did not know that I was a hit squad. No that is not so.

MR DUKADA: Now Mr Shabalala if the intention, there was never any discussion to kill the deceased and you never intended to kill him at all why would there be celebrations a braai and then drinking, congratulations?

MR SHABALALA: The celebratory braais were done by the superiors not myself.

MR DUKADA: Would you have had a braai and drinking if you had not killed the deceased?

MR SHABALALA: No.

MR DUKADA: Mr Chairman thank you. That is all what I wanted to ask the witness.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR DUKADA: .

CHAIRPERSON: Yes very well. Mr Mapoma you do have questions do you?

MR MAPOMA: Yes I do.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Wessels and Mr Matuweni you do have questions?

MR WESSELS: Mr Chairman I have no questions.

MR MATUWENI: I will have no questions Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: You would like to re-examine the witness?

MR KNIGHT: Mr Chairman I would. What time would we intend.

CHAIRPERSON: But do you have any?

MR KNIGHT: Yes I do. A substantial re-examination.

CHAIRPERSON: It seems to me that it is very unlikely that if we have to continue beyond this point we will finish the evidence of Mr Shabalala and unfortunately there are those who still have to travel a distance from here, who have to be away now so unfortunately we would have to bring these proceedings to a close at this stage. And we will continue with these applications. The date has been arranged as the 24th of August to.

MR MAPOMA: I am sorry Sir I am not sure - 28th yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well these proceedings will then be adjourned to Monday the 24th of August and will continue from that day up to and including Friday the 28th of August. On the 24th of August we will commence at what time?

MR MAPOMA: Nine thirty.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes on the 24th of August we will commence at nine thirty. We have to apologise to those who had come to these proceedings. Unfortunately there is no way we can finish these proceedings now and therefore we have to adjourn. Before rising let me express our appreciation to the legal representatives of the parties for the manner in which they have conducted the proceedings so far and also everyone who has made a contribution towards ensuring that this venue is secured and that these proceedings commence and take place smoothly and also to the members of the audience for their behaviour I think suffices to say that we are deeply indebted to everyone from the interpreters to the logistic officers, to the security officers, to the media, to everyone virtually everyone without exception who has made a contribution towards ensuring that these proceedings take place. And may I wish to express my appreciation to my members of the Committee for their patience. Thank you.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS: .