DECISION
Applicant applies for amnesty for the killing of three (3) persons, Makhulu Solomon Khumalo, Richard Suputane Makhubo and Phiphaphang Joseph Kabokoane, at Vaalpark in the district of Sasolburg.
The three (3) deceased were allegedly members of the ANC and, on information acquired from a subordinate, a captain Chris Fouché, also trained members of Umkhonto weSizwe. The group, of which Mrs Elsa de Lange was also a member, was infiltrated by Fouché.
At some stage Fouché established that at robbery was being planned at a shopping centre and it was decided that the group would be arrested at the scene. The intention of the applicant was then to investigate the activities of the group relating to their MK membership, while they could be held in lawful detention.
The necessary preparations for the arrest were made. When the deceased arrived at the centre where they were to be carefully arrested, things went wrong, a shot rang out and all three were killed.
Although the implicated party Fouché was represented at the hearing, he did not give evidence and his counsel informed the Committee that he merely confirms his version (before the Committee as detailed on affidavit in the bundle), which describes the incident as a planned killing.
Elsie de Lange gave evidence and denied any involvement in political violence by either herself or any of the three (3) deceased, although she did admit to criminal activities of the deceased, relating to diamonds. The Committee does not deem it necessary to deal with all the evidence, except to say that De Lange and the deceased knew Fouché to be a policeman. De Lange gave evidence that the plan to rob the Hypersave Shopping Centre originated with Fouché and that she did not accompany them because she could not believe that a policeman would propose such a plan without some ulterior motive. She did not trust the police.
It suffices to say that on the version of the applicant himself, he a planned a lawful arrest when, through some negligence, he ordered his men to shoot after having interpreted gunfire as coming from the vehicle of the deceased. He claims to have ordered the shooting to protect his own life and that of his men.
The question remains why the deceased could not, on the information passed on by Fouché, having been arrested without having to allow the attempted robbery to proceed. The Committee finds that if the killings were indeed planned, the applicant did not take the Committee into his confidence and did not make a full disclosure.
The Committee does not have to make a finding though, because if on the other hand the version of the applicant is to be believed, it does not establish a political objective for the killing. In such an event the killings were done in the course of an attempted lawful arrest and the questions of self-defence and necessity can be decided by a court of law.
In the instance the application for amnesty is REFUSED. No person is accordingly found to be a victim in terms of the Act.
DATED AT CAPE TOWN this 16 day of November 2000
________________________
JUDGE A WILSON
________________________
ADV S SIGODI
________________________
MR W MALAN
