ADV SANDI: In what language are you going to testify Mr Zungu?
PRECIOUS WISEMAN ZUNGU: (sworn states)
EXAMINATION BY MR KOOPEDI: May I then proceed Mr Chairperson?
MR KOOPEDI: Mr Zungu, where do you reside?
MR KOOPEDI: Now is it correct you are a co-applicant in this matter, the amnesty application for the killing of Sicelo Dhlomo?
MR ZUNGU: Yes, that is correct.
MR KOOPEDI: Is it also correct that this incident happened in January 1988?
MR KOOPEDI: Now when this incident occurred, were you a member of any political organisation?
MR KOOPEDI: What political organisation were you a member of?
MR KOOPEDI: Were you at the same time a member of any underground structures of any political organisation?
MR KOOPEDI: Were you an underground member of what political structure?
MR KOOPEDI: Now let's get to the deceased, the late Sicelo Dhlomo, did you know him?
MR ZUNGU: Yes I knew him although not too much.
MR KOOPEDI: Well there is evidence before this Committee that he resided in Emdeni and was a student activist. Now were you - in these underground structures that you were involved in, was he also involved in the same structures?
MR KOOPEDI: Now we have evidence that in fact you, him and the other applicant that came before you had belonged to a particular cell or unit as it is commonly known, is that correct?
MR ZUNGU: Yes that is correct.
MR KOOPEDI: Now let's go to his death. Were you involved in his death, were you present when he died?
MR KOOPEDI: For the sake of brevity I'm going to try and shorten his evidence with your permission Chairperson.
We have evidence here that in fact when he died you had been fetched by Clive to go to some meeting place, is that correct?
MR KOOPEDI: And we further have evidence that in fact before he was killed you were not given any explanation, is that correct?
MR ZUNGU: Yes that is correct.
MR KOOPEDI: Now because you were a member of this unit that executed or killed Sicelo Dhlomo, do you think that this killing had a political motivation?
MR KOOPEDI: What is this political objective that you would obtain?
MR ZUNGU: Although I did not have any idea before Sicelo died but I did get the explanation subsequently, that is subsequent to the incident.
MR KOOPEDI: Now is it on the basis of the political motivation that you seek amnesty from this Honourable Committee?
MR KOOPEDI: Other than the brief facts that you have given us, is there anything that you would want to say to this Committee or any persons present in this hall or elsewhere?
MR ZUNGU: First of all, I would like to thank this opportunity that all this came to the surface about his death and also the fact that I would like my amnesty application to be granted favourable considerations and to the family I would like them to take the past and put it in the back and move on.
MR KOOPEDI: Chairperson, that's all for now from my side.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR KOOPEDI
CHAIRPERSON: Well I think we have to record a little more than you have. He has said simply that although he had no information before, he was told subsequently. I think we ought to at least record were you told by Mr Dube what he said was the reason for killing the deceased?
CHAIRPERSON: Was this what you were told after the deceased had been killed?
MR ZUNGU: Yes that is true. The full explanation, I got it after some time because we did not have enough time immediately after this incident but I was informed however the reasons why he had to be killed. The reason was he was an informer.
CHAIRPERSON: Right, thank you.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR RICHARD: Mr Zungu, did you know the deceased before he joined your cell?
MR ZUNGU: I knew him from school.
MR RICHARD: And which school is that?
MR ZUNGU: When we had meetings for instance that's when I will come across him or I will see him.
MR RICHARD: So you weren't at school with him but you knew him from meetings at school, is that correct?
R RICHARD: And for how long had you known him?
MR ZUNGU: I did not know him for quite some time, quite long rather.
MR RICHARD: How long is that, is that one month, one year?
MR ZUNGU: You mean before this incident? Knowing him before this incident or what?
MR RICHARD: Before he joined your cell.
MR ZUNGU: I knew him from merely seeing him, I don't know as to how long, I can't remember in fact the time.
MR RICHARD: Weren't you aware of his activities, his activism?
MR ZUNGU: I just knew him as any other comrades at school when we meet.
MR RICHARD: Did you know he was a volunteer worker at the Detainee's Parents Support Committee?
MR RICHARD: Did you know anything about the television programmes, the interviews?
MR RICHARD: Now after he joined the cell, did you become aware of his activities?
MR ZUNGU: No, I also had no intentions of knowing that, I had no interest.
MR RICHARD: Now so that means you're unaware of the various times and dates that he got arrested, detained?
MR RICHARD: Now did you have any reason to doubt Mr Tshabalala's suggestion that he join the cell?
MR RICHARD: Mr Tshabalala nominated him and proposed him as a member of your cell and that he joined. What was your attitude to him joining?
MR ZUNGU: I don't want to prolong any answer to that because I had no knowledge about this man.
ADV SANDI: Maybe the question can be put this way Mr Richard.
Do you know how it came about that he became a member of your cell?
MR ZUNGU: I will say I know because I was told, that that was announced to me that there will be one other member will be joining us and we will be working with him.
MR RICHARD: Did you have any say as to whether he should or shouldn't join?
MR RICHARD: Did you mind him joining?
MR RICHARD: Did you ever have any suspicions about trustworthiness?
MR ZUNGU: You're referring to which period here?
MR RICHARD: I'm talking about - well take it this way, between when he joined and October, did you have any suspicions about him?
MR ZUNGU: I will gratefully answer you and say I had no knowledge or any knowledge about Sicelo as such as a person.
MR RICHARD: So prior to October you had no reason to suspect that he was an informer, that's your answer?
MR RICHARD: After October did you have any reason to suspect him?
MR ZUNGU: After October where and what could have happened?
MR RICHARD: After October 1987 or during October 1987 did you have any reason to suspect that the deceased might be an informer?
MR RICHARD: Were you aware that other persons had suspicions?
MR RICHARD: Now so that means it was only after his death that you heard about the suspicions?
MR ZUNGU: Yes except for the time when he disappeared, when I was told by the commander that I must be alert, vigilant, because we did not know his whereabouts.
MR RICHARD: Did the commander explain anything more than it was simply his absence that required you to be alert and vigilant?
MR ZUNGU: I don't remember well.
MR RICHARD: Right, now you were present today and you heard Clive Mkubu the third applicant give evidence and his evidence was to the effect that you received a phone call to be on standby and later in the day he came to fetch you? Do you agree with those statements or dispute that?
MR RICHARD: Now when he phoned you did he give you any reasons as to why you were required to be on standby?
MR RICHARD: At what time did he arrive at your house later to fetch you that day?
MR ZUNGU: It could have been some time in the afternoon although I don't remember the time.
MR RICHARD: Was it daylight or night time?
MR ZUNGU: It was just towards dusk, it was not very dark.
MR RICHARD: Right, now when Mr Mkubu came to fetch you did he explain why you had to go anywhere, what the reasons for the meeting might be?
MR RICHARD: Now when did you first become aware of the fact that the deceased was to be executed?
MR ZUNGU: I did not know that he was going to be killed.
MR RICHARD: When he was killed did you do anything to try and stop it happening?
MR ZUNGU: There was no time for such and nothing occurred in my mind.
MR RICHARD: Why did you think it was necessary for you to be there?
MR ZUNGU: I don't want to lie and commit myself, I think the commander will be in a better position to give explanation.
MR RICHARD: Were you confused as to why you had been brought there?
MR RICHARD: Were you at any stage ever suspicious of Mr Dube, had doubts about his ...(intervention)
MR ZUNGU: That's what he did? What was it that he did that brought me to be suspicious about him?
MR RICHARD: Did you trust Mr Dube?
MR ZUNGU: As a commander, yes.
MR RICHARD: Did you have any doubts about him at any stage?
MR RICHARD: What was your opinion of his explanation for killing Mr Dhlomo?
MR ZUNGU: Please repeat that question?
MR RICHARD: What was your opinion of his explanations for killing Mr Dhlomo? Did you believe they were sufficient?
MR ZUNGU: After he gave us the explanation I held no opinion.
MR RICHARD: So that means you didn't accept the explanation or reject it?
MR ZUNGU: I don't want to say that, I don't remember.
MR RICHARD: Were you ever involved in any other summary executions?
MR RICHARD: Were you ever aware of any other?
MR RICHARD: Now you've heard me put various propositions to the last applicant where I outlined that - sorry one last questions before I do that. You've heard the last applicant, Mr Tshabalala say the deceased joined the cell during August/September, do you agree or disagree with that?
MR ZUNGU: I don't want to lie, I don't want to commit myself to this, I have no recollection of the dates.
MR RICHARD: Now while he was a member of the cell did Mr Dhlomo take part in any of the submissions or operations?
MR RICHARD: Well the evidence is that he did not, do you disagree with that or you just don't remember?
MR RICHARD: Do you think if indeed he was an informer it was necessary to execute him?
MR ZUNGU: During those days it was public knowledge that the informers will be killed.
MR RICHARD: Do you still think Mr Dhlomo was an informer?
MR ZUNGU: I did say that I bear no knowledge.
MR RICHARD: Now from the time that Mr Dhlomo joined the cell to say six months, a year after his death, did anything happen to the cell which might have made him suspect that an informer might have been involved in the cell or had access to information relating to the cell?
MR ZUNGU: I don't remember, I remember nothing.
MR RICHARD: No further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR RICHARD
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR KOOPEDI: Just one Chair.
You have just said that it was publicly known that informers were killed during those days, do you recall that?
MR ZUNGU: Although I don't want to say as to who would execute but mainly people were killed during that time who were known or labelled as informers.
MR KOOPEDI: And those informers were exposed to the public to have been informers and that was made a reason why they were killed, the public was made to know. Is it not so?
MR ZUNGU: During those days informers were killed, that was the practice.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes and everybody knew they were informers, they were told "this is an informer who is being killed."?
MR KOOPEDI: And in this particular case of Sicelo Dhlomo, he was thereby exposed to the public that he was an informer is it not so?
MR KOOPEDI: Are you able to explain why?
MR ZUNGU: Although there's nothing much for me to explain but the way we operated then, it was not exposed. Whatever we were doing we were doing it underground.
MR KOOPEDI: Did it not surprise you when you were instructed not to expose an informer?
MR ZUNGU: Please repeat your question?
MR KOOPEDI: Did it not surprise you when you were given instruction by your commander not to expose an informer?
MR ZUNGU: That did not cross my mind and again even if it did I would have said no, I think I'm mistaken here because whatever we were doing we did it underground.
MR KOOPEDI: Thank you Chairperson no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR KOOPEDI
CHAIRPERSON: Any re-examination?
MR KOOPEDI: Nothing in re-examination.
ADV SANDI: Mr Zungu, just explain something to me. At the place where Sicelo was killed, what explanation was given to you for killing him?
ADV SANDI: I'm talking about were you not there when Sicelo was shot and killed?
ADV SANDI: In your evidence in chief you said an explanation was given to you at that place and subsequently you were given more details. Now let us start about the one that was given to you when you were at the place where he was killed. What explanation was given to you?
MR ZUNGU: Although I don't remember everything but what was said to me was the fact that we should not be surprised about the decision that has been taken because this person was going to be of danger to us.
ADV SANDI: Is that all that was said to you on that day?
MR ZUNGU: Although I don't remember quite much maybe other things will come as time goes on but nothing much was said at any rate.
ADV SANDI: Yes but you said subsequent to that occasion, that was the day when he was killed, a more detailed information was given. What information was this? What reasons were advanced for having Sicelo killed?
MR ZUNGU: After that that is exactly when I was told that a transmitter was found in his possession and that he also had a firearm but he never returned. I don't quite remember other details but these are things I remember.
ADV SANDI: Are you personally aware of any information as to Sicelo, if he was an informer, which he could have conveyed to the police about yourself?
MR ZUNGU: As I said I had not known Sicelo for quite some time or some time, I was still learning or getting closer to him at the time.
ADV SANDI: Did you associate yourself with the killing of Sicelo?
MR ZUNGU: You are referring to which period, do you mean after this incident?
MR ZUNGU: When Sicelo was killed did you agree that this was a good thing? You say you were given reasons subsequent to that. Did you agree that it was a good thing to kill him?
MR ZUNGU: I don't want to say whether I agreed or disagree, I have no answer but as I already said, the community at large also knew that if one has been found or it has been established that one is an informer there were no any other means but to kill.
ADV SANDI: If Sicelo was an informer, would it have made any difference to you as to whether he was in a position to convey information to the police?
DR TSOTSI: Mr Zungu, did you see this transmitter that Sicelo been carrying?
DR TSOTSI: You just accepted without question that he had in fact been carrying a transmitter?
MR ZUNGU: I was only told once.
DR TSOTSI: Yes but you say you didn't say the transmitter, you were told that he was carrying the transmitter is that right?
DR TSOTSI: Now the only reason therefore according to you that Sicelo was killed was that the fact that he was carrying this transmitter?
MR ZUNGU: You mean according to me?
DR TSOTSI: Yes according to you, I'm talking about you.
MR ZUNGU: What I heard is that.
DR TSOTSI: No you told us before that the decision before had been that you should call Sicelo when had a ...(indistinct) and the question about what he had been doing, isn't that right, but that the possession of a transmitter changed that situation and it was therefore decided he would be killed?
MR KOOPEDI: With respect Honourable Committee Member, I do not recall this witness saying that was said by previous applicants but not him.
INTERPRETER: The speaker's microphone is not on.
COMMITTEE MEMBER: When Sicelo disappeared and you didn't see him, did you as a group discuss his position?
MR ZUNGU: I was told that Sicelo has disappeared and therefore we must be alert, vigilant.
DR TSOTSI: Is that all that was said?
DR TSOTSI: Did you anticipate, did you except that Sicelo would be killed when he arrived or were you taken by surprise when in fact he was killed?
MR ZUNGU: I had no idea as I said because I did mention that I was only told after the incident.
DR TSOTSI: Alright, that you had accepted the fact that Sicelo had been killed?
DR TSOTSI: You didn't say that after a time you had accepted?
MR ZUNGU: Please may you repeat your question?
DR TSOTSI: Did you accept that it was correct to have killed Sicelo when he was killed?
MR ZUNGU: Even when I realised that but at that time there was nothing much I could have done or I could do.
DR TSOTSI: Isn't it a fact that you were persuaded to accept the killing of Sicelo because of these allegations that he was carrying a transmitter?
MR ZUNGU: Please repeat that question?
DR TSOTSI: That isn't it a fact that you associated yourself with the killing of Sicelo because you heard that he was killing a transmitter?
MR ZUNGU: If that had already happening whether I was also associating myself or not it mattered not.
ADV SANDI: But Mr Zungu, sorry, I must say that may you sound very vague and non-committal in your responses to the questions that are being asked but why have you applied for amnesty for this incident?
MR ZUNGU: I'm now applying for amnesty because this happened in the company of my comrades and I was part of them as well.
ADV SANDI: You didn't do anything, you did not even know why he was killed?
MR ZUNGU: Yes as I already said I only got the explanation afterwards.
ADV SANDI: Did you accept that explanation, did you feel that those reasons were sufficient to kill Sicelo?
MR ZUNGU: I had no any other way but to follow what was happening.
ADV SANDI: Why did you not disclose what had happened to the organisation or even to the family including the police?
MR ZUNGU: The state in which we were working and exposed to was obvious that whatever we were doing had to happen underground and to take place underground.
ADV SANDI: Thank you, sorry ...(indistinct)
CHAIRPERSON: And it's correct is it not that you did not inform anyone of what you had seen happening that evening?
CHAIRPERSON: Right. Thank you.
MR RICHARD: As to the further witnesses, at present I have two.
CHAIRPERSON: Have you any other witnesses?
MR KOOPEDI: I have no other witnesses to call.
CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct) Richard?
MR RICHARD: Sorry Chairperson, I was participating. I have two witnesses present, Mr Joe Tlhwale has arrived. My request is that we adjourn for about 10 minutes while I confirm and take - otherwise I'll be leading him on ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: No, we'll take a very short adjournment.
ADV SANDI: Can you please give us your full names?
RAMATALA JOSEPH TLHWALE: (sworn states)
EXAMINATION BY MR RICHARD: Sir, I must start by thanking you for coming to the hearing at such short notice and thank you for waiving proper notice of service of the subpoena.
CHAIRPERSON: We will add our thanks to that so that we can dispose of this hearing.
MR RICHARD: In and during the period 1986 through to 1988, where were you working?
MR TLHWALE: At the Detainees Parents Support Committee as a welfare officer.
MR RICHARD: What did this organisation do?
MR TLHWALE: We were looking after the needs of the detainees and political prisoners.
MR RICHARD: Now who else worked with you at the time?
MR TLHWALE: The late Sifuma Sita, Daphne Mashele and Tommy Mashabane and also the late Sicelo Dhlomo was working as a volunteer worker with us.
MR RICHARD: When did the deceased, Mr Dhlomo, start working at the organisation?
MR TLHWALE: I can't recall the date but I think he came in just after his arrest. When he was arrested I'm not sure when in 1987, when he had a pistol with him, just after coming out of detention into the office and he was given a position as a volunteer worker.
MR RICHARD: And when did you first meet him?
MR TLHWALE: I met him around '86.
MR RICHARD: Was it as a result of his approach to the DPSC for assistance?
MR RICHARD: Now how many days would he be there?
MR TLHWALE: Usually he would come to the office from Monday to Friday and even sometimes we'll have tea parties for parents of detainees. He'll also help in those situations.
MR RICHARD: And now in October 1987 were you aware of any particular events, was he detained?
MR TLHWALE: Yes I know that he was detained.
MR RICHARD: What do you know about that detention?
MR TLHWALE: I think on that day he was in the office with us and what happened was that mainly the ...(indistinct) which was bombed, the entrance downstairs, the security guard had there an alarm system ...(intervention)
MR RICHARD: I'm talking about October 1987, January 1988, there were two events. Now according to my instructions on the 12th October 1987 Mr Dhlomo was detained while on his way to school, are you aware of that incident?
MR TLHWALE: I'm not sure whether I can recall that or not.
MR RICHARD: Now at that stage did you receive any request for accommodation or rearrangement of his sleeping arrangement?
MR TLHWALE: Yes I think he did because of the harassment which we got from the police and I had a flat in Hillbrow and I offered that he can come and stay with me because I was staying alone in that flat.
MR RICHARD: Now when he came to stay with you, do you remember from when it was?
MR TLHWALE: I think it was from October '87 up until the date when he was shot.
MR RICHARD: Now at that stage were you a member of the MK?
MR RICHARD: And did that entail you having weapons in your flat?
MR TLHWALE: Yes I had weapons in my flat.
MR RICHARD: And did Mr Dhlomo know that?
MR RICHARD: Now ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: What sort of weapons?
MR TLHWALE: I was in possession of a Makarov pistol and a Stetchem(?) and I had several grenades in my flat.
MR RICHARD: Now when it came to entering and leaving the flat what was the arrangement?
MR TLHWALE: The arrangement was that the flat, it was not registered in my real name and the other occupants of the flat even didn't know of my activities as an activist and also as an underground operative of MK and we were just as ordinary people just like them and entering, going in and going out was just as normal as possible.
MR RICHARD: Did Mr Dhlomo have his own key?
MR TLHWALE: Yes I did make available a key for him.
MR RICHARD: And you were quite happy that he should be entrusted with that responsibility?
MR RICHARD: Now how many nights a week would he spend at the flat?
MR TLHWALE: Sometimes he stayed a whole week, sometimes he'll say he's going to see his gran in the township.
MR RICHARD: And how often did he go back to the township to see his family there?
MR TLHWALE: Not much, I think twice or once per week or over the weekend.
MR RICHARD: Now at the time you say he was in more or less daily attendance at the DPSC, was he ever visited by anyone?
MR TLHWALE: Sicelo I think he was one popular activist in the township so particularly during his days as a student activist they used to come to the office, some of his friends and colleagues at school because I knew for a fact he was a student at Pace College in Soweto.
MR RICHARD: Do you remember the names of any of his visitors?
MR TLHWALE: I remember only one and who is one person who knows my brother also, Rambo.
MR RICHARD: What was Rambo's other name?
MR TLHWALE: I've just forgotten, I'm not sure if he was Humphrey but I think I know the one Rambo.
MR RICHARD: And if I said Sipho Humphrey Tshabalala?
MR TLHWALE: Yes I know the name very well.
MR RICHARD: Also known as Rambo. Now how often would Sipho Tshabalala come?
MR TLHWALE: Several times he'll come to the office, not only to Sicelo, he also had very good relationship with the late comrade Sophie Masete.
MR RICHARD: And were you aware of any relationship between Sipho and Mr Dhlomo?
MR TLHWALE: Only as student activists, yes that I know.
MR RICHARD: Now ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Are you going on to something else? Can I just clear up something?
He worked for you from Monday to Fridays I gather you said?
CHAIRPERSON: As a voluntary worker, but now there's also been reference of him going to school and his school friends in that he was a student at Pace College. How did he attend school when he was working with you for five days a week?
MR TLHWALE: What I was saying, I think I said during his school days he was a student activist and Rambo, I knew him as Sicelo's friend during those days as student activist.
CHAIRPERSON: So these people were not school friends at the present time, they were from the past?
MR RICHARD: Now at that stage were you aware, I think you've answered the question but I'll repeat it, why Mr Dhlomo had decided no longer to live and sleep in Soweto?
MR TLHWALE: I think the problem was police harassment more than anything.
MR RICHARD: And do you remember whether he continued going to school after he came to your flat?
MR TLHWALE: No, I don't recall that.
MR RICHARD: Now during the period October, November and December, were there any events of note other than that first arrest in October that might have alarmed you about Mr Dhlomo or made you suspicious of his behaviour?
MR TLHWALE: To my level of understanding now because there was once an incident which happened at Khotso House when Security Police were coming in and an alarm rang and all of us we ran out of the office and Sicelo took the opposite direction of the entrance, the main entrance, and I went the opposite into the passage was the Black Sash Office.
MR RICHARD: I'm sorry to interrupt you, that was in January?
MR RICHARD: I was coming to the 20th January. I mentioned the period October, November and December, not January yet. Was there anything that might have made you suspicious or doubt or uncomfortable with Sicelo?
MR RICHARD: Now in January 1988, do you remember an event on the 20th, I think you begun reciting that?
MR TLHWALE: Yes, this is the event I was just explaining and he was arrested on that day, taken to John Vorster for interrogation and I can't recall whether he was released the same day or the next day, that I can't recall.
MR RICHARD: Did he report to you what happened while he was being interrogated?
MR TLHWALE: I think some of my colleagues in the office took a statement from him about the torture and stuff, of things happened to him during that period.
MR RICHARD: Now do you remember him ever having anything on his belt?
MR RICHARD: Could you please describe the size and shape of this thing?
MR TLHWALE: I'm not good in sizes but I'll show it in ...(indistinct) it was a size like this one, something like this in a square shape.
MR RICHARD: It has been described in resembling about the shape and size of this object which is connected to the microphone.
MR TLHWALE: Now I'm not sure but walkmans which usually people had and put there, it could be the size of this thing possibly.
MR RICHARD: Was there ever any doubt in your mind that it was anything but a walkman?
MR RICHARD: And it took cassettes which he played music to himself on?
MR RICHARD: Now did you ever see Mr Dhlomo in possession of a firearm?
MR TLHWALE: At Khotso house I'm not sure but I don't recall any stage when I saw him with a weapon in those offices. Even myself, I couldn't go in with a weapon during the day there.
CHAIRPERSON: Where did you see him with a weapon?
MR TLHWALE: At the flat, he was staying with me.
MR RICHARD: We then come to Saturday the 23rd January 1988. What did you do over that weekend?
MR TLHWALE: Sicelo on the 22nd if I recall, which was a Friday, he left and said he was going to see his granny and I was supposed to go to a conference in Cape Town. I was flying on Saturday morning for Cape Town and we went together to the office, and when I went back to the flat he didn't come with me, I was alone. He slept over in Soweto the Friday and it seems on the Saturday, met up with the late comrade Sophie Masete and he was given cash of an amount of between R1 000 and
R1 500 which was supposed to come to me. I met up with comrade Sophie afterward because we were flying together to Cape Town and she said to me that she gave Sicelo that amount of money which was supposed to come to me and since then Sicelo didn't turn up until we came back from Cape Town on Sunday and Monday morning. It's when we heard the news that Sicelo's body was found in the veld next to Emdeni.
MR RICHARD: Now one last question. During the period that he stayed with you and you took care of him, did you ever have any reason to suspect that he might be an informer?
MR TLHWALE: Not at all because I think I was supposed to be his first victim if he was an informer.
MR RICHARD: Now during that period there was a lot of activity with informers?
MR RICHARD: How is it that the police identified him at Khotso House?
MR TLHWALE: I think because of his previous arrests, it was possible that they could identify him.
MR RICHARD: Did you know about his television programmes and radio broadcasts interviews?
MR TLHWALE: Yes I do know about those things, "The Children Against Apartheid", it's one of the interviews which we had.
MR RICHARD: No further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR RICHARD
CHAIRPERSON: I take it you've never seen that television programme?
CHAIRPERSON: I take it you have not seen that television programme, it hasn't been screened here?
CHAIRPERSON: When? When was it screened here?
MR TLHWALE: Sorry Judge, I don't think it was screened but there was an uproar about it within the country just after it was screened overseas, yes it's true but it was in the newspapers, a lot about it in the newspapers.
ADV SANDI: It was not broadcast on national TV was it?
MR TLHWALE: No it wasn't, yes and I have a copy of the video, so.
MR MAPOMA: I have no questions for this witness.
MR KOOPEDI: Thank you sir, I have no questions.
ADV SANDI: Mr Tlhwale, this thing - just one or two things, this thing you've referred to as a walkman he had on his waist, who did it belong to and what was it for?
MR TLHWALE: No, it was his, it was a tape playing cassette ...(indistinct)
ADV SANDI: Did you say he was in possession of weapons at the flat?
ADV SANDI: Can you give a description of those weapons, what were they?
MR TLHWALE: He had a Makarov pistol and two handgrenades in his possession.
CHAIRPERSON: How did he support himself?
MR TLHWALE: Generally as I said that he was a volunteer worker in the office. A sum of money was paid to him monthly.
CHAIRPERSON: So a volunteer worker didn't mean unpaid worker?
CHAIRPERSON: He was paid monthly.
MR TLHWALE: Ja, during those times there were grants for volunteer workers for transport and for food.
CHAIRPERSON: This R1 500 that was to come to you, what was it to be used for?
MR TLHWALE: The money was my personal money. What happened in 1986, a friend was skipping the country, took the money from me and when he was in Zambia the ANC had to refund the money back to me and that's how the money came into the whole like chain of hands until it ended up in Sicelo's hands.
CHAIRPERSON: So it would not have been going to Baragwanath Hospital?
MR TLHWALE: I'm not sure of that one.
CHAIRPERSON: No, because if it was your money?
MR TLHWALE: Yes, it was my personal money.
RE-EXAMINATION BY MR RICHARD: May I ask two or three further questions?
What became of the handgrenades and Makarov pistol that Sicelo had?
MR TLHWALE: I think that the night of Friday, I mean the day of Friday when he left I suppose that he left with those things because they were not in the flat afterwards. It was only the material which belonged to me in the flat.
MR RICHARD: Did you watch the cassette video that you had on the television programme?
MR RICHARD: Did Sicelo's face appear in the video?
MR TLHWALE: Prominently, definitely so.
MR RICHARD: Now last question, was money given to detainees at Baragwanath Hospital?
MR TLHWALE: Yes money was given to detainees at Baragwanath Hospital.
MR RICHARD: Who gave the money?
MR TLHWALE: We were a group of about four or five people in the office and mostly because even myself I was sometimes in detention and Ms Ntombi Mosikare was the person who usually went to hospital to give money to the detainees.
MR RICHARD: If the deceased had been found with that amount of money, what sort of explanation would have been given to them? Would you have said hold on, it's comrade Joe's money or would he have told some other story?
MR TLHWALE: That one I don't think I have a definite answer for it because I wasn't in that situation.
MR RICHARD: But would he have told people your name if he was asked where he stayed?
MR RICHARD: Thank you. No further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR RICHARD
ADV SANDI: Sorry, just one thing Mr Tlhwale, did he tell you where these weapons came from? What did he say about these weapons?
MR TLHWALE: I think myself as an underground operative, part of my work was secret and I couldn't even discuss with him some of the things even units or cells which I belonged to and also I think that was his modus operandi, he couldn't say where, like to me, where he got the weapons but I knew that he was an operative.
ADV SANDI: In other words he never asked you?
MR RICHARD: My next witness is Ntombi Jane Mosikare.
ADV SANDI: Good afternoon Madame, can we ask for your full names?
NTOMBI JANE MOSIKARE: Good afternoon Sir, my name is Ntombi Jane Mosikare.
ADV SANDI: In what language are you going to testify?
MS MOSIKARE: English. (sworn states)
EXAMINATION BY MR RICHARD: Thank you.
In and during the period 1986 through to January 1988, what did you do and where did you work?
MS MOSIKARE: I was working at the DPSC office as one of the full time staff.
MR RICHARD: And what were your activities there?
MS MOSIKARE: Well, doing some advice work and also taking statements from people who were released from detention and also families who were coming to report that their children have been detained.
MR RICHARD: Now during that process did you ever arrange for legal representation?
MR RICHARD: Did you arrange for legal representation for the detainees?
MS MOSIKARE: Yes we arranged legal representation also that people came out of detention were sometimes tortured and others suffered psychological effects so we had to send them to NAMDA and to the doctors as well.
MR RICHARD: Now which attorneys did you refer ex-detainees to?
MS MOSIKARE: There were a number of lawyers around Johannesburg who were handling cases.
MR RICHARD: And was Mr Ismail Albe's office one of them?
MR RICHARD: Right, now during that period you came to know the deceased, Sicelo Dhlomo?
MR RICHARD: When did you first meet him?
MS MOSIKARE: Well the office I think was opened in 1985 but I joined them early in 1986 after the killing of my brother.
MR RICHARD: And when did you meet the deceased, Mr Dhlomo?
MS MOSIKARE: I'm not quite sure when I met him but I think it was 1987.
MR RICHARD: If I give you some dates in and during the period June to November 1986, he spent a period of three months in - he spent that period in detention, three months in solitary confinement of it. Then again there was an incident on the 12th October 1987. Was it in connection with either one of those incidents that he first made contact with the DSPC?
MS MOSIKARE: I think the first contact was with the mother because what happened is that when a person gets detained, then it's the mother that would come and seek legal assistance so I remember all three incidences.
MR RICHARD: And another one in 1987 when he was arrested, prosecuted and convicted of possession of a firearm, do you remember that one?
MS MOSIKARE: I remember quite well.
MR RICHARD: Now when did his mother come and see him, was it 1986 or 1987?
MS MOSIKARE: I think it was 1986.
MR RICHARD: So it's logical then that on his release at December '86 or early '87 he would have made contact with you?
MR RICHARD: Now in what way did you assist him?
MS MOSIKARE: At first is that when he was released from detention we would take a statement first and find out what happened in detention, whether he was tortured you know, those kind of things and whether he - in most cases people who would complain that after they were detained, they were asked to be informers, so we had to check with everybody so that if people, you know agreed to be informers so that they could be released then they would have to be referred immediately to a lawyer to make a statement.
MR RICHARD: Was Mr Dhlomo one of those people?
MR RICHARD: During that period if somebody had been detained, asked to become an informer, when you debriefed them, what would they tell you?
MS MOSIKARE: Well we would really you know speak to them and tell them you know to be open on what had happened in detention and we would say that we would want to assist them in whatever way we can so that we make it, you know, easier for people, you know, to open up.
MR RICHARD: And was it a frequent or infrequent occasion to hear a story that somebody, while in detention?
MS MOSIKARE: Can you repeat your question?
MR RICHARD: Was it a frequent or infrequent occurrence that individuals that had been in detention would report to you had to stop torture, had agreed to be an informer but now that they were out they were not going to be informers?
MS MOSIKARE: I'm not sure that I understand what you are saying?
CHAIRPERSON: Did many detainees tell you that while they were in detention they had agreed to be informers because they were being treated so cruelly?
MR RICHARD: And when they came to see you they continued to say that now they were out they would not inform?
MS MOSIKARE: Yes, many of them would say that also that now, you know, "I agreed to be an informer because I wanted to be released, I didn't want to stay in the cell."
MR RICHARD: Now were those people who made that sort of report to you treated as informers?
MR RICHARD: And it was usual to accept after properly briefing obviously that statement that they were not informers and had no intentions of complying with their agreement with the police?
CHAIRPERSON: Do I understand that these people would be referred to attorneys so that they could make a statement to an attorney about this attempt to make them turn them into informers?
MS MOSIKARE: Yes, definitely and some of them didn't know who the attorneys were because when you get detainees, the family that comes, so we would pull out the file and check if the case was reported and we would tell the person who his lawyer is and if the person, you know, came to the DPSC for the first time and the matter was not reported then we would look for a lawyer immediately.
MR RICHARD: So it was usual to find files at some attorney's offices with basically amounted to debriefing statements?
MR RICHARD: Now to which attorney did Mr Dhlomo go?
MR RICHARD: Did you refer him there or was it?
MS MOSIKARE: Yes, it was a DPSC referral.
MR RICHARD: So that means the fact that there is a coherent paper train of the various incidents in his files is in no way surprising, it's in fact what's to be expected?
MR RICHARD: Now how well did you get to know Mr Dhlomo?
MS MOSIKARE: After his arrest, when he was found in possession of a firearm, he did a lot of work with the DPSC, he volunteered at the DPSC office and most of the staff members at that time were highly wanted by the police including the one that who was, you know testified Joe Tlhwale. So in most cases they would come in and out and Sicelo was mostly available at that time so that's when I knew of him very well and the mother used to come and see Sicelo at the office so she used to say how poor she was because she was selling at the school so I was very sympathetic to him and that he was getting very little money for transport so I used to do some other things like buying clothes for him.
MR RICHARD: So you developed a close interpersonal relationship?
MS MOSIKARE: Yes at one stage I even offered a hiding place for him but he didn't want to go out in the East Rand where I was living and he said that he loved his grandmother a lot and he doesn't want to be far from his family.
MR RICHARD: Now during this period he'd obviously get to know various people who would be wanted by the police for various things?
MR RICHARD: And in fact he had what amounts to a responsible and highly confidential job?
MR RICHARD: And did you ever have any doubts that he was a person that could be entrusted with that sort of responsibility and trust?
MS MOSIKARE: No. In fact what happened is that some other attorneys, when they went to visit detainees at a prison, even the ones that were held under emergency regulations or Section 29, they would give some legal notes to the lawyers and say please give it to somebody at the DPSC office and that was highly confidential matter.
MR RICHARD: And to the best of your knowledge he never betrayed your trust?
MR RICHARD: Just for the sake of the record, is it not correct that this arrest for a firearm is the event that led to him being convicted and sentenced to a five year period imprisonment, suspended?
MR RICHARD: And that was early in 1987?
MS MOSIKARE: I think it was late in 1987, I'm not quite sure of the dates.
MR RICHARD: That's the incident that you were referring to?
MR RICHARD: Now while he worked at the DPSC was he visited by anyone?
MS MOSIKARE: Yes, there were a lot of comrades who used to come and visit him and including the family and they would also contact him through the phone.
MR RICHARD: Now do you remember the names of any of his friends or visitors?
MR RICHARD: What names do you remember?
MS MOSIKARE: I remember Clive and I remember Rambo.
MR RICHARD: When you say Rambo that's a nickname for somebody. Who is that?
MS MOSIKARE: Yes, that's the third applicant.
ADV SANDI: Sorry, just to ensure that there will be no confusion on the record. Isn't that Sipho Humphrey Tshabalala? I thought that Mr Tlhwale said that was Humphrey, Rambo was Humphrey. Do you know the full names of this person?
MS MOSIKARE: No, not the full names, I only knew the famous names that we used at that time.
CHAIRPERSON: Were Clive and Rambo the same person?
MS MOSIKARE: No, Clive I would refer him as the one who appeared the second time yesterday and the other one, the one who was here round about two when I arrived.
CHAIRPERSON: The third one, who was he?
MS MOSIKARE: I know him as Rambo.
MR RICHARD: Thank you. Now how often did these people come?
MS MOSIKARE: Several times, I wouldn't count how many times.
MR RICHARD: Do you remember seeing the one Sipho Humphrey Tshabalala during the period October '87 to January '88?
MS MOSIKARE: Yes, I would think that's the period when Sicelo was not staying with his parents.
MR RICHARD: Where was he staying at that time?
MS MOSIKARE: Well at first after he was released and I think what he said in court was that he was in possession of a firearm because he was defending himself and at that time when he arrived in our offices there were also other white volunteer workers and a lot of people were sympathetic to his case and a lot of people offered hiding place for him so he would stay in various places until he got a stable place with Joseph Tlhwale.
MR RICHARD: When did that place become stable, before or after October?
MS MOSIKARE: It's after October.
MR RICHARD: And before that was he staying with various other people?
MR RICHARD: Now you say the second applicant, that's Mr Tshabalala, who was the third applicant to give evidence, that's the confusion, came on various occasions. Do you remember how often after October '87 he came?
MS MOSIKARE: Well I don't know how often.
MR RICHARD: More than once, more than five times?
MS MOSIKARE: It's more than once but I cannot count how many times.
MR RICHARD: That's fair enough, now were you aware of any particular relationship between Humphrey Sipho Tshabalala and the deceased?
MS MOSIKARE: Well I don't know of any relationship but what I know that when he came to the office he would sometimes talk to him and sometimes they would walk out and after some few minutes Sicelo would come back to the office.
MR RICHARD: Did you see anyone else besides Mr Tshabalala?
MS MOSIKARE: Yes, the second applicant.
MR RICHARD: When did you see him?
MS MOSIKARE: Well as I've said, many of them I saw at the time when after Sicelo was released and he was, you know, away from the township.
MR RICHARD: Was that before or after October?
MR RICHARD: Now according to my instructions an event happened in January 1988. Do you remember any event on or around the 20th of that month?
MS MOSIKARE: That was when Sicelo was detained at Khotso House.
MS MOSIKARE: We were busy working in the office and at Khotso House they used to have an alarm system. When the police came they would press it and then it would ring in all the offices then we would know that is the police. So what happened on that day is that the security guard saw the police that entered through, you know, the front door and he didn't see that some of the police entered through the basement so Sicelo tried to run out using the stairs so that's when he was, you know, arrested by the police and they came with him and joined others who were already in the office.
MR RICHARD: Now how did the police identify him?
MS MOSIKARE: They identified him as a person who had appeared on the television.
MR RICHARD: Were you aware of the television documentary?
MR RICHARD: And also aware of various other broadcasts with Dutch Television, CBS News - I mean radio news?
MS MOSIKARE: Yes, a lot a media came to the office and they would say that we want maybe a child or a family and we would be the one to identify such families and you know, approach them first if they feel like, you know, being interviewed.
MR RICHARD: Now for how long was he detained on that occasion which started on the 20th January?
MS MOSIKARE: If I'm not mistaken he was released the next day.
MR RICHARD: Now I know you haven't got a bundle of the papers before you - I'm indebted to my colleague - but between pages 58 and 66 there is a selection of newspaper clippings relating to the deceased and his detention in January. Are you aware of them?
MR RICHARD: Now particularly, think carefully before you answer the question, in and during October 1987, the year before, were there any similar press reports?
MS MOSIKARE: Before October '87?
MR RICHARD: Around October '87, specifically in October '87.
MS MOSIKARE: I don't quite recollect.
MR RICHARD: Would you recollect if there had been newspaper clippings?
MR RICHARD: Now on his release did the deceased return to the DPSC offices?
MS MOSIKARE: I remember the last incident because immediately after the police have identified him they searched the office and Audrey Coleman said to me that I should take money from the petty cash and go buy Sicelo some toiletries so I went out to a shop opposite Khotso House about that and I gave it to him and I also gave him a track suit.
MR RICHARD: Now after he was released did he come back to the office and talk to you?
MR RICHARD: Now if you turn to page 63 of the bundle in front of you?
MR RICHARD: It's a newspaper clipping. Unfortunately it's undated as far as I can see. There you will see two columns
What was that about, what was going on in there? Do you know whether he signed a statement while in police custody?
MS MOSIKARE: As I say that I don't quite recall it but I remember that after his release, it's actually Audrey Coleman who was taking his statement and I was laughing at some of the things that was said by the police when they released him.
MR RICHARD: Do you remember what the police said?
MS MOSIKARE: The thing that made me to laugh was that they said they were releasing him to his grandmother which they were referring to Audrey Coleman and they said that
"Your grandmother talks too much."
MR RICHARD: Now when did you last speak to the deceased?
MS MOSIKARE: On Saturday, I think it was the 22nd. He phoned me at home in Duduza, it was five to eleven and he said to me that he wanted to discuss with me something that was very confidential and I said to him that I was on my way to town and from Duduza which is in Nigel next to Springs, it would take me another one hour to get to Johannesburg because what he wanted was that we should meet at the DPSC office and I asked him that can't that wait until Monday because I don't have any money and I have to go to town and he said well, he seemed you know doubtful and he said okay.
MR RICHARD: Now there's been talk about a certain thing that he wore on his belt. Were you aware of anything that he wore on his waist belt?
MS MOSIKARE: Yes I was aware because he was listening to that while he was working.
MS MOSIKARE: I think something like a radio that one could listen to alone. You know you could put something like this and then have it wherever in your body.
MR RICHARD: And so if somebody called it a radio cassette or a walkman?
MS MOSIKARE: Well I'm not sure whether it was using cassettes or it was just a radio.
MR RICHARD: Now what did it look like?
MS MOSIKARE: Well it was a square shaped, the length was not, you know, so much, it was like this but a little bit bigger than this.
MR RICHARD: What colour was it?
MR RICHARD: Now did you ever have any reason to doubt that it was anything but a radio or a cassette player?
MS MOSIKARE: No I never doubted that because he was using it in the office while people were coming in and out, everybody was seeing that.
MR RICHARD: Now at any stage did you ever have any reason to believe that he might have been a police informer?
MR RICHARD: No further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR RICHARD
MR MAPOMA: No questions for this witness.
MR KOOPEDI: Thank you Sir, I have no questions.
ADV SANDI: Sorry, that was not very clear to me, the very last part of it. Did you in fact see him in January after he had been released from detention?
ADV SANDI: Where did you see him?
ADV SANDI: What did he say had happened to him whilst in detention?
MS MOSIKARE: I don't remember everything that happened, I think one of the things that he was questioned about was his involvement in the documentary film and ja, that's what I remember.
ADV SANDI: Did he make any mention of an attempt by the police to recruit him?
ADV SANDI: What did he say about that?
MS MOSIKARE: Well as I say that I don't quite recollect and I was not the person who took the statement but I remember him talking about that.
ADV SANDI: Did he say he did in fact succumb to such pressure to work with the police?
ADV SANDI: But you did not take the statement then?
CHAIRPERSON: Can you remember what day this was on? I'm trying to work backwards.
MS MOSIKARE: Which one, the last arrest?
CHAIRPERSON: Ja, the last time you saw him.
MS MOSIKARE: The last time I saw him was on Friday because I even, when he phoned me on Saturday I even asked him why didn't he talk to me on Friday.
CHAIRPERSON: And it's on the Friday he said, told you he had agreed to work for the police?
MS MOSIKARE: No it was, you know, after the release, immediately after the release that he said that, I don't remember the day.
CHAIRPERSON: Well he was arrested on what day?
ADV SANDI: Was it not the 20th, Mr Richard?
MR RICHARD: Wednesday the 20th.
CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct) the 21st?
MR RICHARD: That is the answer.
CHAIRPERSON: Did you see him on that day?
INTERPRETER: The speaker's mike is not activated.
CHAIRPERSON: You saw him again on the Friday?
CHAIRPERSON: And which day was it you thought he told you he'd been, agreed to work for the police?
MS MOSIKARE: In fact he was not telling me alone, he was saying it in an office.
ADV SANDI: Did he say how the police were going to make it possible for him to work for them?
MS MOSIKARE: No, I don't remember.
ADV SANDI: Did he express any attitude about him having been successfully recruited by the police or having agreed to work for the police?
MS MOSIKARE: As I say I don't remember you know, everything.
CHAIRPERSON: Was he sent to a lawyer then?
CHAIRPERSON: On which day, on the?
MS MOSIKARE: On the day that he was released.
CHAIRPERSON: And he also made this other statement on the same day?
RE-EXAMINATION BY MR RICHARD: May I ask one further question. As a point of clarification, the version that I have is that while in detention on the 20th he agreed to be an informer so as to be released as soon as possible and be able to get on with his normal activities other than informing on who he worked with, is that not correct?
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR RICHARD
ADV SANDI: Sorry, just one thing. When he phoned you on Saturday morning, you said at about 11, did he give any indication as to what exactly he wanted to talk to you about? Did he make any vague mention of what he wanted to discuss with you?
MS MOSIKARE: No, he refused when I asked him and he said that he has to sit down with me.
ADV SANDI: Did he say this was something sensitive, what did he say, how did he describe?
MS MOSIKARE: He said it was confidential and he cannot say it over the phone.
MR RICHARD: The remaining two witnesses are the TRC's former investigator, that's Mr Pillay Zwane and Mr Lester Dumukude. Mr Dumukude, I have no knowledge whether he has kept his undertaking to be present until today and Mr Zwane will be available tomorrow so I don't have anything further.
CHAIRPERSON: Is Mr Dumukude here?
MR KOOPEDI: I have some explanations. Mr Dumukude spoke to me yesterday before we adjourned that he stays at work, he was given until Wednesday, you know re the hearing Ellis Park. He had not anticipated that he would be kept here until after his leave days. He further indicated to me that he was made to be aware that in fact this means that he might have to give evidence and be asked questions and that he thought he would need a lawyer for that but he just told me that and I passed on the message to both my learned friends here.
CHAIRPERSON: Are you acting for him?
CHAIRPERSON: Do you know where he works so he can be contacted? I can understand when he was only expected to be here for a few days he wouldn't spend the rest of the week sitting here. Do you know how he can now be contacted at work with a view to getting him here tomorrow?
MR MAPOMA: I am sure my learned friend and myself would be able to find him, his particulars are well known to the TRC Amnesty Committee so ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Can arrangements be made for him to be legally represented so that we can conclude this matter tomorrow?
MR KOOPEDI: Chairperson, if he has no objections with me assisting him I would assist, I would have no problem.
CHAIRPERSON: We would be most obliged if you would do that. Very well, if the two of you can now make arrangements to make sure he is here tomorrow morning? How long will we take?
MR RICHARD: I have only one point that I wish to cross-examine him on and that is the report mentioned in paragraph 6, page 11, where the first applicant Mr Dube says
"I then reported the matter"
CHAIRPERSON: That might take five minutes. Very well, you could advise him on that one.
MR KOOPEDI: I must say the evidence as it stands is that if I understood Mr Dube correct, he did not report to him, he reported to Grasskopf.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes and if Mr Dumukude confirms that then that's the end to the matter and we will have addresses from you after we've finished the evidence tomorrow morning?
MR KOOPEDI: I was hoping I could persuade you to allow us to do written representations.
CHAIRPERSON: Well the policy of the Amnesty Committee of late has been that we will from now on we will endeavour to get oral argument at the hearing. If you wish to amplify by written submissions later you may do so in certain cases but we would like you to deal with the witnesses certainly while they are all fresh in our minds.
What time tomorrow morning? We don't need to start earlier.
MR RICHARD: 08H30 Mr Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: Well to me it makes no difference, I only have to walk across the road but I'm aware that others of you come from very much further. 9 o'clock.
MR RICHARD: Chairperson, one last statement? It is possible for me to arrange for the person mentioned by the last witness, Mrs Audrey Coleman, to be present to give evidence tomorrow. She is the person who handled the debriefing on the Thursday/Friday. Would the Committee desire it?
CHAIRPERSON: I don't know what she can could say, what she can remember? It's a matter I think you should take up with her because she's now being asked about something eleven years ago.
MR RICHARD: She does remember quite clearly and I have spoken to her. She has to be brought from Plettenberg Bay, I'll speak to her and see what her response is.
CHAIRPERSON: Is the statement she took still available?
MR RICHARD: I would have to ask her directly.
CHAIRPERSON: It seems to me that if she took a statement at the time, by agreement that statement might be handed in and save having the expense of bringing the lady from Plettenberg Bay here because unless you feel she must come to say anything over and above what she said in the statement because really it's what he said to her what was recorded at the time. What is your views on that?
MR KOOPEDI: I'm not sure what my learned friend would really want to get from her. As I understand it the evidence that she will be giving would not be contested so I don't know.
MR RICHARD: In the light of that ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Well if you could communicate with her and with your learned friend then it might be possible by consent to say that he told them he had been agreed to become a police informer. That is it or whatever it is.
MR RICHARD: I'm certain it's quite possible for me to get an affidavit from her setting out and if my learned colleague does not want to cross-examine her, unless subject to the Committee, I'm happy with that.
CHAIRPERSON: I don't want at this stage to bind us to say we will accept and agree to an affidavit when we haven't seen it. It may raise all sorts of matters.
MR RICHARD: Chairperson, what I shall do is phone her and see ...(intervention).
CHAIRPERSON: Because nowadays I keep forgetting, if you can do things over fax and all sorts of other machines that you can get a thing back in 20 minutes, can't you? Yes, well we'll leave it to you to decide. From what you have told me I don't think it's necessary to fly her up here from Plettenberg Bay, it's too much expense and inconvenience and having regard to the co-operation there has been throughout this hearing, I'm sure that agreement can be reached.