--------------------------------------------------------------------------CHAIRPERSON: ... Wednesday, the 21st of October. We are now gathered to hear the amnesty application of Bulengesi Justice Majosi.

The Committee consists of myself, Andrew Wilson and Judges Potgieter and Khampepe.

ADV PRIOR: Thank you, Mr Chairman. For the record, the Evidence Leader is Paddy Prior.

MR MNOWABE: Thank you, Mr Chairman. For the applicant, it is M A Mnowabe.

CHAIRPERSON: Is the matter ready for hearing, Mr Prior?

ADV PRIOR: The matter is ready for hearing, Mr Chairman. The applicant is present. My learned friend and myself have agreed that the bundle that was presented to the Committee be admitted in evidence as Exhibit A and that the statements of the documents contained therein are admitted as correct insofar as they reflect the facts.

MR MNOWABE: I confirm that, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well. Are you now going to call the applicant?

MR MNOWABE: I'm now going to call the applicant.

ADV POTGIETER: Mr Majosi, would you please rise?

MR MAGADE: I'm sorry to interrupt, Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman, if I might just at this stage before the applicants proceeds, inform the Committee that my name is Shelwyn Magade. I appear on behalf of certain implicated persons. We were served with the notices in terms of Section 19(4), to be here for the amnesty application of Mr Cyril Bongani Tusi(?).

At this stage I would just like to place on record that we were advised to be here today and for this week for this application but we were advised when we got here that the application was in fact withdrawn. And my instructions from my counsel are to just place on record that whatever allegations are made in that amnesty application, we will be addressing correspondence to the TRC setting out our clients' version of the facts.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well, thank you. Does that finish your job for the day? You are excused.

MR MAGADE: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

ADV POTGIETER: Thank you. Mr Majozi, are your full names Mlungesi Justice Majozi?

CHAIRPERSON: You may be seated now.

MR MAJOSI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh sorry, he hasn't been sworn in.

MLUNGESI JUSTICE MAJOSI: (sworn states)

MR MNOWABE: Mr Chairman, if I can proceed.

Mr Majosi, you apply for amnesty in regard to the shoot-out that ensued on 1st July 1991 near Port Shepstone.

MR MAJOSI: That is correct.

MR MNOWABE: Can you actually state what was your political affiliation at that time?

MR MAJOSI: I was a member of the ANC.

MR MNOWABE: Yes. Now you made a statement in substantiation of your application, which is reflected at pages 5 and 6 of the bundle of documents. Do you confirm the contents of that statement?

MR MAJOSI: Yes, I do.

MR MNOWABE: I see. Now insofar as the incident is concerned, you said you are a member of the ANC, can you briefly relate to the Committee how it came about that you were involved in this incident? What was the purpose when you actually were intercepted by the police, what were you up to?

MR MAJOSI: We left Pietermaritzburg for Durban where we had to meet other MK members and that is where it was decided or where it would be decided that we would have to get arms which we could use to train other comrades in Maritzburg but the problem was that the weapons were not there and we had to go to Port Shepstone to fetch them.

We drove in a car which picked us up at Ultra City. We went to pick up the arms at Port Shepstone, at Gamalakhe Township. We met other comrades there who stayed or resided there at a particular house belonging to comrade Bam.

We spent some time there trying to gather the weapons and we explained certain things or discussed certain things with other people. After that our car came to pick us up to take us back home where we had to take the weapons to.

We got into the car with these weapons and we kept these weapons inside the vehicle where we were seated ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, before you go on, can I just clarify something? As I understand the position, the weapons had been brought up from the Transkei by the ANC and you were supplied with the weapons by the ANC or by Umkhonto weSizwe in Port Shepstone, to take them elsewhere, to take them back to Maritzburg?

MR MAJOSI: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Carry on. You've told us now that you kept the weapons in the car. The weapons I think were AK47 assault rifles and Stechkin machine gun and ammunition in sealed containers?

MR MAJOSI: We had AK47s, the handgrenades as well, Stechkins as well as ammunition for all the weapons.

CHAIRPERSON: Carry on.

MR MAJOSI: ...[no English translation] Comrade Madoda who was a member of the MK suggested that we stand guard. We saw a white police vehicle in the area and after that we got into our car and we drove towards Pietermaritzburg.

Along the way we saw this vehicle following us and they stopped us. On stopping us they wanted the licence for the vehicle, there were four of us in the vehicle. He found the licence for the vehicle, verified this with other officers using his radio and one policeman drew his firearm. He pointed it at me as I was sitting on the left side at the back of the vehicle.

I had already drawn my pistol and gave it to Madoda who was sitting in front of me. He is then the one who made use of this pistol to shoot the police. That's when the problem started. If you still remember very well, the police indicated that there were several roadblocks that we drove through where the exchange of gunfire took place.

MR MNOWABE: If I can just come onto this. The policeman, Groenewald who was shot at the scene, was that to avoid being arrested?

MR MAJOSI: We were fleeing with the firearms and making sure yes, that we are not arrested. Our people were being killed at the place where we were headed.

MS KHAMPEPE: The question is, why did you shoot the policeman, Groenewald?

MR MAJOSI: He was also a member ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Do you know who Groenewald is?

MR MAJOSI: No, I don't remember him.

CHAIRPERSON: This is the Sergeant who came up to your car when the car had been stopped, the first policeman who was shot. Why was he shot?

MR MAJOSI: He had already drawn his pistol when the driver got into the vehicle. He then drew his firearm, pointed it at us and stopped us. We realised that something was wrong. Already the police were following us when we had left where we had come from.

MR MNOWABE: You then indicated that you went through roadblocks and it's actually, the facts are common cause that - yes, that's all common cause. What I just want to know is will you confirm, are you saying that these firearms were actually obtained in furtherance of a political objective?

MR MAJOSI: That is correct.

MR MNOWABE: And that the shooting of the police and ensuing shoot-out that followed was in furtherance of this purpose, you had to hold onto the weapons?

MR MAJOSI: That is correct.

MR MNOWABE: What happened to your firearm, this Stechkin that you had been carrying?

MR MAJOSI: We exchanged gunfire with the police as we were fleeing and when our car was somewhere along the road it was shot at. I now had another gun. I took this firearm, got out of the car and exchanged or returned fire. I was covering them because they were already shot.

MR MNOWABE: Was it ultimately recovered by the police, the Stechkin?

MR MAJOSI: I think yes, they did find the firearms.

MR MNOWABE: Yes. And you were then arrested along with Madoda Mkhize?

MR MAJOSI: What I can say here is that I saw them last when we got out of the vehicle, crossing the river. I was coming from behind, following them from behind trying to make sure that the police do not continue shooting at us.

MR MNOWABE: After your arrest you were duly tried and convicted of attempted murder and possession of firearms and ammunition, is that so?

MR MAJOSI: That is correct.

MR MNOWABE: You had pleaded not guilty then?

MR MAJOSI: That is correct, because I would not have pleaded guilty at the time when we were living under a repressive system, therefore I did not want to plead guilty.

MR MNOWABE: Are you saying it would not have been politically correct at the time to have admitted having possessed the firearms and so forth?

MR MAJOSI: That is correct.

MR MNOWABE: Are you presently at Westville Prison serving a sentence which was imposed upon you by the Magistrate of Port Shepstone?

MR MAJOSI: That is correct.

MR MNOWABE: Now the policeman who was actually shot at point blank, how do you feel about him?

MR MAJOSI: We are now talking peace and reconciliation. I know that I am one of the people who had done wrong things. They too know that they were involved in wronging us. We want to make peace. Some of our people with whom we were working know that we had agreed to be engaged in this. We need peace now.

MR MNOWABE: Thank you. I have no further questions, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Prior?

ADV PRIOR: I have no questions, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: No questions by the Members of the Committee.

MR MNOWABE: I close the applicant's case, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Before you do, will you just tell us what is the applicant's case?

MR MNOWABE: Yes. The applicant's case is that he had been acting under instructions ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: I want the specific details.

MR MNOWABE: Oh yes.

CHAIRPERSON: All he has said in his amnesty application is:

Now if you look at page 13, it appears that he was convicted there of the two AK47 rifles but that was set aside on appeal. He was convicted of possession of ammunition, three handgrenades and a 9mm Stechkin pistol. Is it in respect of that weapon not just the machine gun in the abstract, but possession of the Stechkin pistol that you're asking for amnesty?

MR MNOWABE: Yes, Mr Chairman, that is the Stechkin and ammunition.

CHAIRPERSON: And another problem I have is when did this happen?

MR MNOWABE: On the 5th of July 1991, the 1st of July 1991.

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible]

MR MNOWABE: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: In the vicinity of Port Shepstone?

MR MNOWABE: Yes, it was - ...[indistinct] in Port Shepstone.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Prior, it's quite clear that this was part of what is being referred to as the struggle of the past. There's no suggestion is there, anywhere in the information before us, that there was any personal objective or that the firearms were to be used for any purpose other than those of Umkhonto weSizwe?

ADV PRIOR: Mr Chairman, that is quite correct. There was no suggestion that the weapons were to be used, for example in a robbery or whatever.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

ADV PRIOR: Mr Chairman, may I place on record that the policeman involved, Mr Groenewald, at this stage cannot be located. I spoke to Mr Larreman yesterday, one of the traffic officers who was also a complainant in the matter.

May I firstly just put on record that Mr Larreman does not oppose the application and asked me to convey that to the Committee. He informed me that he was very close to Mr Groenewald. Mr Groenewald was severely traumatised as a result of the shooting incident, had left the police force and had left Natal to go up to the Transvaal somewhere, and although he was very close to him, he has also lost track of him and hasn't been contacted by Mr Groenewald in a number of years. Be that as it may, I would ask the Committee in due course to refer Mr Groenewald to the R & R Committee and obviously they will endeavour to track him down. Thank you, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: I take it that the other people who were interested were notified and none of them have shown any indication of wishing to oppose or appear?

ADV PRIOR: That is quite correct, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: I don't think we need hear you, Mr Mnowabe.

MR MNOWABE: Yes.

F I N D I N G 21.10.1998

CHAIRPERSON: The applicant in this matter asks for amnesty in respect of the possession of a machine gun, ammunition and possession of grenades and attempted murder.

On the evidence before us and on the information contained in the bundle put before us, Exhibit A, it is clear that on the day in question, that is on the 1st of July 1991, the applicant and his companions had travelled down from Pietermaritzburg through Durban to Port Shepstone. They did so in the course of their duties as members of Umkhonto weSizwe, and the purpose of the visit was to enable firearms to be obtained which could then be used on behalf of Umkhonto weSizwe in the Pietermaritzburg district.

The firearms were obtained from the Transkei from ANC sources, and that morning they left Port Shepstone. Shortly after they had commenced their journey they noticed a police vehicle following them. It later caused them to stop.

Policemen got out and first asked for the licence of the vehicle and then indicated, I think it is quite clear, an intention to search the vehicle. The weapons were inside the vehicle, they were not in the boot of the car which was found to be empty. When the police approached the vehicle itself, we are told that Sergeant Groenewald drew his pistol whereupon one of the applicants companions drew his gun and opened fire on Sergeant Groenewald.

They drove away and were pursued by the police. They came upon other police vehicles and roadblocks and there was firing between them and the policeman and ultimately their car came to a halt. They fled into the bush, where the applicant was arrested. He was subsequently charged and convicted of attempted murder and various contraventions of the Arms and Ammunition Act.

We are satisfied that the applicant was acting on behalf of Umkhonto weSizwe, as part of what was then contemplated was the struggle for the liberation of the country and that there was no personal motive involved, nor were the firearms to be used for anything other than the objects of Umkhonto weSizwe.

We are satisfied that he has complied with the requirements of the Amnesty Act, and that the acts for which he seeks amnesty were acts committed with a political objective in terms of the Act.

The information before us is to the effect that he was in possession of a Stechkin pistol which is a form of automatic pistol, and a great deal of ammunition as well as the handgrenades but on appeal his conviction for possession of the two AK47 rifles was set aside and there is no application before us, and this has been confirmed by his counsel, in respect of the AK47s.

We accordingly GRANT THE APPLICANT AMNESTY IN RESPECT OF THE ACT OR ACTS OF ATTEMPTED MURDER COMMITTED ON THE 1ST OF JULY 1991 on the road between Hibberdene and Port Shepstone and in respect of THE CONTRAVENTIONS OF THE ARMS AND AMMUNITION ACT, relating to the possession of a 9mm Stechkin pistol and 466 rounds of 9mm ammunition and 537 rounds of AK47 machine rifle ammunition and three handgrenades at the same time and place.

We are informed that it has not been possible to make contact with SERGEANT GROENEWALD who was severely wounded in the incident. He has retired from the police force and has lost contact with those who knew him in the past. We are nevertheless satisfied that HE IS A VICTIM and we direct that his name be referred to the R & R Committee with a request that they do what they can to enquire as to his whereabouts and to loss or damage he may have suffered.

That concludes our decision in this matter.

MR MNOWABE: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

ADV PRIOR: Mr Chairman, may we take a short adjournment. I see Mr Wills has arrived, just to discuss what is to happen. Please all rise.

CHAIRPERSON: We are now hearing the application of Monteguese Beguise Ntuli. The Committee is the same as earlier this morning.

ADV PRIOR: Evidence Leader, Paddy Prior.

MR FALCONER: Thank you, Mr Chairman. My name is Patrick Falconer. I appear on behalf of Mrs Mbuyase and the Mbuyase family who are victims in this matter.

MR WILLS: Mr Chairman, I'm John Wills from Pietermaritzburg. I appear for the applicant.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you ready to proceed?

ADV PRIOR: Mr Chairman, we are ready. May we just place on record the following:

That there were other victims as well. I understand from my colleague, Mr Falconer, that they all since this incident have passed away. That's Mr Matenjua - Mr Falconer has more knowledge of that, it's only come to my attention a short while ago.

MR FALCONER: Mr Chairman, if I might have leave to place certain preliminary matters on record. I'm instructed by Mrs Mbuyase that her son, Lucky Mbuyase who is mentioned at page 1 of the bundle of papers died in 1994. Ben Mlambo was evidently killed last year and Lakahipo Matenjua was killed in 1992. As I say, I haven't received instructions on behalf of any of the other victims in this matter.

Mr Chairman, for obvious reasons it's been rather difficult for me to obtain instructions, given the fact that the persons who were allegedly involved in the attack on Mr Ntuli's house on the 26th of August, all appear to be dead. I am however instructed that when charges were preferred against them in respect of that attack, their defence was that at the time of the attack they were in the Matkambeni area at Umtumzini and on that basis denied any involvement in it. I'm given to understand that charges were withdrawn against them, presumably on the basis of that alibi.

CHAIRPERSON: They were in fact saying they weren't victims?

MR FALCONER: That is correct, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: I gather from what you said, that although they may have been injured by shrapnel, the injuries were not of a serious nature?

MR FALCONER: Regrettably, Mr Chairman, I haven't had an opportunity to establish the severity of those injuries.

CHAIRPERSON: Well they were in fact themselves charged thereafter, they didn't die as a result of the injuries of the shrapnel.

MR FALCONER: That is correct, Mr Chairman. It's on that basis that I'm instructed not to oppose the application for amnesty and that the Mbuyase family will abide the decision of this Honourable Committee. But with your leave, Mr Chairman, there are a few aspects which I have been requested to obtain clarification on and to put restricted questions to the applicant in due course.

ADV PRIOR: Thank you, Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman, may I just confirm that I have an Investigative Unit report which confirms that the victims, Lucky Mbuyase and Lakahipo Matenjua both are deceased but in incidents unrelated to the one presently before the Committee.

And finally, there is consensus on the bundle, that is go in as Exhibit A, Mr Chairman. Without further ado we are ready to proceed with the applicant.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you calling the applicant now, do you want him sworn in?

MR WILLS: Yes, indeed, thank you, Mr Chairperson.

ADV POTGIETER: Can you give your full names for the record please.

MR NTULI: I am Monteguesa Beguise Ntuli.

ADV POTGIETER: Do you have any objection to taking the oath?

MONTEGUESA BEGUISE NTULI: (sworn states)

ADV POTGIETER: Mr Wills?

EXAMINATION BY MR WILLS: Thank you, Mr Chairperson, Members of the Committee. Before I commence my questioning in this regard, Mr Chairperson, I'd like to just place on record that as the bundle has been placed before all the parties, I'm going to lead the witness and should anybody have any objections to the way I lead then obviously they will do so, but I think that it will save time in the long run, thank you.

Mr Ntuli, you are presently the Chairperson of the African National Congress in the Norther Natal region, is that correct?

MR NTULI: That is correct.

MR WILLS: You - at the time of this incident in respect of which you are applying for amnesty, that is in August 1992, you were the Regional Chairperson for the Congress of South African Trade Unions and you were also a National Union of Metal Worker's of South Africa office bearer.

MR NTULI: That is correct.

MR WILLS: Now you are applying for amnesty in respect of the possession of a handgrenade and also in respect of two counts of attempted murder.

MR NTULI: That is correct.

MR WILLS: At the time - and Mr Chairperson, I'm sorry, we may as well do this now. I'd like to make two typographical corrects to the papers, the first is at paragraph 7 on the date. The first sentence is 1992 as opposed to 1996.

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible]

MR WILLS: Paragraph 7 on page 6 of the papers.

MS KHAMPEPE: 1992?

MR WILLS: It should be 1992, yes, thank you. And the second one is at paragraph 18, the name in the second sentence is not Manzini but Mazwi: M-A-Z-W-I and the same in the next paragraph.

CHAIRPERSON: Is it the same in the next sentence?

MR WILLS: Yes, the same in the next sentence, not paragraph. Yes, thank you, Mr Chairperson.

Mr Ntuli, can you briefly explain to the Committee the political climate in which this incident occurred, with specific reference to the number of your comrades who were being killed at that time.

MR NTULI: Chairperson, thank you very much for granting me this opportunity. Since Cosatu's formation it so happened that many members in different places of employment, like firms in Empangeni etc., were attacked by members of the IFP because Cosatu was perceived as a movement that perpetuated the aims of the ANC which was banned at the time.

There was also the UDF and MDM. The situation was very tense and in 1990 after the ANC was unbanned, ...[indistinct] the SACP, the atmosphere politically speaking intensified. Many people who were members of unions, especially at the company where I was working and where I am still employed but at that time I was working as a shop steward. Every weekend we used to bury people in their large numbers.

The political climate at our area was such that one would never know who would die the following day. The climate was very tense and this led to what experience I went through, where the IFP were attacking us. Shortly, this is how the political climate was at the area, at the region where I was Chairperson of Cosatu.

MR WILLS: Yes, and you say in paragraph 6 that during that time Willis Nkunu who was also a Numsa office bearer, had his house burnt down, Mike Mbuakulu was attacked. He was also a Numsa education officer I think at the time, and various other persons were attacked and some of whom were killed. Do you confirm that?

MR NTULI: Yes, I do confirm that. It was not only confined to Numsa members, these attacks that is, people such Taliwe who was a shop steward of Pow(?) at the time, people who were activists within the ANC, people such as Naftel Nmani, they were being killed left right and centre.

MR WILLS: And on the same night as the attack on your home, a local Cosatu Chairperson, Sam Noia was in fact killed.

MR NTULI: That is correct.

MR WILLS: Now, can you briefly tell us what occurred on the evening of the 26th of August 1992?

MR NTULI: On the 26th, on the very same month that you have just mentioned, Chairperson, I came home from a Cosatu meeting as usual. I used to reside a house in eSikhawini H1. The house is nearer to the police station, the eSikhawini Police Station.

I came back. I was with Enoch Nzuza. He is one of the organisers for Numsa. He also survived several attacks at Ndlangobo where he used to stay. I then decided to bring him to my place where he could sleep for the night because we were concerned about his safety.

I went to the house with Rich and Lucky Ntuli, two boys who are my brother's sons and there was also in our company, Msize Nkunu who was guarding me at the time because we were being attacked as leaders of our movement. We then took a decision that our leaders should be guarded all the time.

I think it was round about half past nine when I got into the house and went to sleep. I went to sleep and they remained behind watching television. I think it was round about 10 when I was woken up by gunshots, shots that were being fired through my window and all over the place, the dining-room, the kitchen and everywhere.

I got a fright, I woke up and I had a licensed 9mm pistol. I tried to make out as from which direction the gunshots were being fired in relation to the room in which I was sleeping. Msize who was guarding me at the time rushed to my room to make sure that I was safe. He told me to take cover. Even though I could be in the position to protect myself at the time it was his duty and it was my responsibility to listen to him because he was taking care of my safety.

I listened to him and the gunshots continued incessantly. They had already thrown carnages of handgrenades into the house at the time and we all tried to rush outside. I then told Msize that I would like to help him because he is the only one who was trained and therefore in the position to can protect all of us. We then agreed.

We tried to retaliate. The handgrenades were thrown and we rushed to the bathroom, opened water to try and get some - I'm sorry, it was not a handgrenade it was teargas, we rushed to the bathroom. We were used to the handgrenades because we also suffered the same fate at the hands of teargas. We were used to teargas experiences at the hands of the police. We rushed to the bathroom.

All members of our union and activists knew that in cases of teargas attacks we had to get wet cloths. On entering the bathroom we thought the gunshots would stop but they did not. I ran out of ammunition and Msize and myself agreed that he should defend all of us and get us out of the house.

He got the rest of the people out of the house, Enoch Nzuza and myself remained behind and Enoch Nzuza had just been attacked the very same morning. Enoch Nzuza had survived an attack that very same morning. He would then bring some alcoholic beverage with him ...[intervention]

MS KHAMPEPE: ...[no English translation]

MR NTULI: I'm sorry. He had a hot stuff or hot alcohol which he was consuming to try and cope. It therefore became very difficult for him to withstand the teargas attack and we had to carry him if we really wanted to protect him and take him to safety, myself and Msize.

Msize said I should leave the house and I resisted. I said he should be the one who gets out of the house because he still had ammunition. Msize then got out of the house and myself and Enoch remained behind.

After Msize had left the house the gunfire stopped. I rushed to the kitchen door which was open, left open when Msize ran out of the house. And I can say that is about eight metres distance between my house and that of my immediate neighbour. There were four people in a lying position facing towards the open door at the house.

The people who had left the house, I already know that they were three and I started wondering why there were four people lying there when only three people had left the house. I concluded that this could not be the three people who had rushed out of the house.

I called out and the response that I got was a gunfire. The person who fired the shot must have thought that I was shouting or calling out from the bathroom window towards which he then fired. I then realised that these cannot be the people that I know.

I then called out to Rich, my brother's son. They then realised that the voice was coming from the direction of the door. They fired these shots towards the door and they shot just above my head and I was then convinced that this cannot be the people that I know. They were wearing black clothes and I think they were trying to camouflage so that they could not be identified.

After some time a white van came and drove past a street just behind their backs, on the other side. That is when I realised that these are the enemies because they all had rifles. I then realised that these are the people who are attacking my house. They also had balaclavas covering their faces. They rushed to the van and I concluded that they were rushing to the van to get some more ammunition because they had already fired for more than 45 minutes.

I then stayed on at the door, not leaving because I wanted to see what they would do ultimately. They then came towards a window at the kitchen, all four of them and I could no longer see them from where I was standing.

They slowly and gradually approached towards the window. When they got there they said I should give them the gun that I was using to shoot them. I did not respond. They were appealing, saying I should give them my gun and they would let me go. They thought I was shooting them with an AK and they wanted this AK. They said if I did not give them this AK they would come in and threw another teargas canister, handgrenades, shoot me and kill me.

I heard something being thrown inside again and I thought they had thrown yet another teargas canister into the house. When they said they will throw teargas canisters and handgrenades in the house I immediately remembered that there was a handgrenade in the house that I had seen Msize carrying one day.

I crawled to the place where this hand grenade was kept and I kept praying that it should be intact because if it was not connected or disconnected to the detonator I would not have been in the position to use it. I found this handgrenade intact and I brought it back, crawled back to the kitchen.

The door to the kitchen was clear. No lights were on in the house, it was just dark and I realised that they were now desperately trying to get hold of my gun. At that time I told them that I was badly injured as a result of the shots and I could not move. I think they must have thought that it was now going to be easy for them to get me.

They came in rushing and pushing through the door. I gave them the handgrenade. I rolled it and removed the pin and gave it to them and it exploded. I heard them screaming like small children, fleeing. When I checked the situation at the door it transpired that the shrapnels were all over the place and I was not in the position to escape myself because of the lot of dust resulting from the explosion.

After the dust had subsided I then got out of the house. When I got out of the house I saw something that was lying next to the door. I ran to my neighbours where I telephoned the police. When I phoned the police I did not give them my real identity but then they apparently picked up my voice and wanted to know if I am Bheki Ntuli and I got a fright.

MR WILLS: Yes, thank you, Mr Ntuli. You've said in your affidavit that you reported the matter to the police and you didn't get a lot of assistance, but we want to just concentrate on the event for which you are applying for amnesty.

Is it not so that you did indeed possess the handgrenade that later exploded, that you later threw?

INTERPRETER: Chairperson, the speaker's mike.

MR NTULI: Would you please repeat the question?

MR WILLS: Is it not so that you illegally possessed the handgrenade which you later threw at your attackers?

MR NTULI: Yes, it is true. Shortly before I threw the handgrenade yes, it was in my possession. This time this simply means that the handgrenade was now mine because it was in my possession. The house was mine as well.

MS KHAMPEPE: May I interpose, Mr Wills?

The lawyer would to know or the attorney would like to know shortly whether it is true that the handgrenade that you used to fight back in attacking the people or retaliating to the people who were attacking you was illegal.

MR NTULI: Yes, that is true, the handgrenade was illegal. It was quite a powerful handgrenade, an F1 from Russia.

MR WILLS: Yes, and is it also not true that there was a possibility that you could have also run away outside of the house to get away from your attackers, but rather you decided to stay behind and you eventually threw the handgrenade at the attackers?

MR NTULI: Yes, it is true, Chairperson, that I was in the position to flee and leave my house behind so that they could continue doing whatever.

CHAIRPERSON: That would have meant that you left Enoch Mzuzu behind, who was in a bad state after the teargas, wouldn't it have been?

MR NTULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: Just finally, Mr Ntuli, I just want a little bit more detail. You mentioned in your affidavit and also in your evidence that Msizi - this Msizi is a person by the name of Msizi Nkunu, he had been allocated by political structures to guard you, is that correct?

MR NTULI: Yes, that is correct, that Msizi had been delegated to take care of my safety in the Northern Natal region. The organisation at the time, or should I say there were many members of our union who were being killed and so that at the end a decision was made that we should be guarded so that we could be safe from harm.

MR WILLS: Yes, and Msizi Nkunu at the time was a member of MK, is that right?

MR NTULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: Thank you, Mr Chairperson, that is all the evidence from the applicant.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Prior?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY ADV PRIOR: Thank you, there's just one aspect, Mr Chairman.

It seems that as far as you were concerned you were acting in self-defence when you threw the grenade at your attackers, because if you hadn't done that they would have surely come into the house and dispatched of yourself and your friend, is that right?

INTERPRETER: Chairperson, the speaker's mike.

MR NTULI: Yes, it is true that I was fighting in self-defence, trying to protect myself or defend myself and my property. But I am here to ask for amnesty for using a handgrenade that was illegal at the time and also the attempt on their lives. Yes, I am asking for amnesty in respect of these incidents.

ADV PRIOR: At page 14 of Exhibit A a document was put up, an extract from I believe the amnesty applications of the Caprivi trainees, one Romeo Mbambo and it seems that in that application the attack on yourself was well documented from paragraph 125 of that document, where it seems that those persons had planned to attack and kill you, did you see that document in the bundle that was shown to you? What I'm putting to you is that it seems that there was a planned attacked on your life on that day as you have indicated, and that comes from a different source.

MR NTULI: Yes, that is correct. It is also clear that the political climate at the time indicated to that because Romeo himself did not plan this himself but it was due to the political climate at the time.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, the political climate was violence on both sides wasn't it, because Romeo in his application says that this attack was in retaliation for an attack on Councillor, Mrs Ntjale's house?

MR NTULI: I would not be in the position to say but I know it is true that there were attacks and counter-attacks. Some of these attacks were planned and some were not.

Myself as a leader, if people did things as members of their organisations trying to protect their membership, that is their prerogative, that's their right. In my case I was given somebody to guard me but yes, I know that Mrs Ntjale was also attacked in the very same area where we resided.

ADV PRIOR: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR FALCONER: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

Mr Ntuli, can I refer you to page 18 of Exhibit A? You will see that that is an affidavit which you deposed to ...[intervention]

MR WILLS: Sorry, Mr Chairperson, I don't think the applicant has got the whole bundle, if I can just cause him to ...[indistinct]

MR FALCONER: Do you confirm that that is an affidavit that you deposed to, Mr Ntuli?

MR NTULI: Maybe I would have to explain first if I may be given the opportunity to do that. There are two affidavits here now. With your permission I would like to explain.

ADV POTGIETER: Yes, please explain.

MR NTULI: Thank you, Chairperson. The attack on Cosatu members as eSikhawini and members of the UDF involved the IFP and the police force. On several occasions I went to the police to ask for help and they did not respond, so that this affidavit is such that I made it before I was assured that I would be safe. In December 1996 the Commission was Empangeni, I stated in the records that I did the first affidavit under pressure because I did not trust the police at the time and it was not easy for me to trust the police at the time. This I had already rectified.

I pointed this out during the Commission in December 1996. Yes, I did sign the affidavit but under duress following the situation at the time. That is why we have this affidavit to which you are referring now.

CHAIRPERSON: That affidavit is as far as I can see, full of criticisms of the police. You're naming members of the police force, you say they didn't appear to help you.

MR NTULI: Yes, it is true, they did not even bother to come to my assistance. I must also point out that in December 1996 when I made this statement nobody came to me to force me to say things as they were. If you look at this statement it clearly indicates that they were trying to attack me with a handgrenade. There was nothing I could have said at the time that I could do something to protect me against the police because the police would kill me. I then had to make use of other avenues such as making use of structures that were legally organised.

MS KHAMPEPE: On this affidavit, Mr Ntuli, there is nowhere where you talk about you attacking them with a handgrenade, that is the people who were attacking you, is that not so?

MR NTULI: Yes, there is such ...[intervention]

MS KHAMPEPE: I'm talking about this one.

MR NTULI: Yes.

MS KHAMPEPE: We don't have that information here. As you have indicated you did not include that here because you did not trust the people who were investigating the matter?

MR NTULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR FALCONER: Mr Ntuli, if I can refer you to paragraph 20 of that affidavit and I'll read it quickly, you state:

Now Mr Ntuli, it would seem that that paragraph is a completely different version of events to that which you state in your affidavit supporting your application for amnesty, and in particular at paragraph 16 of that affidavit, would you agree with me?

MR NTULI: Let me repeat what I have just said. Yes, this statement had to change because if I had indicated that I was the one who threw them with the handgrenade they would kill me in broad daylight and nothing would be done about that.

Proof of this is that I phoned them shortly after the attack and nobody came. Thereafter this one police officer came and I knew him not to be in good relations with us, therefore I would killed in broad daylight and nothing would be done about it.

CHAIRPERSON: When was this affidavit made? The copy we've got has no dates on, it has no attestation.

MR WILLS: Mr Chairperson, this affidavit was made within a week of the incident and it was handed to the investigating officer who came from outside, a person by the name of I think at the time, Captain Sumuru. It was made in 1992 in early September.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR NTULI: Chairperson, just to add, Sumuru was not the first person to come. The first person to come was Westling who claimed to have come from Pretoria. I did not even trust that he was a police. He said I should tell him how I managed to escape from the attack and he said that means that I had a lot of guns in the house. I then told him to go to hell because he had not come to investigate in good faith and then ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: We've had about a 20 minute discussion when the only question asked of you was when this affidavit was made, you were going to be asked a question about page 18 which you were referred to, could we get back to that and not go on and on with this?

MR FALCONER: Who prepared this affidavit for you, Mr Ntuli?

MR NTULI: Which one are you talking about?

MR FALCONER: The affidavit which we are referring to now and which I've just referred you to paragraph 20 of, the one that your attorney has mentioned was deposed to within a week of the incident.

MR NTULI: I wrote this myself and I also requested a certain gentleman who is in parliament now, he was in charge of the peace structure at the time, I have forgotten his name, he is actually the one who assisted me. I did not trust him at the time, I would give him what information I had to and I knew that ...[intervention]

MS KHAMPEPE: Would you please be short and precise in your answering of questions. If you can explain as to whether you are the one who wrote the affidavit we would appreciate that.

MR NTULI: Yes, I am the one who wrote this affidavit.

MR FALCONER: Would you confirm that what is contained in paragraph 20 of the affidavit is false?

MR NTULI: That is correct.

MR FALCONER: Do you not think that you should have brought an application for amnesty in respect of a charge of perjury?

MR NTULI: I don't think so because I took an oath in the presence of the Commissioner.

MR FALCONER: I have no further questions, thank you, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Any re-examination?

RE-EXAMINATION BY MR WILLS: Yes, just very briefly. Mr Ntuli, is it not so that the true facts as regards you throwing the handgrenade were brought out before you before the Truth Commission, I think the Human Rights Violation Commission in December 1996 at Empangeni?

MR NTULI: That is correct.

MR WILLS: Thank you, no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Just one point I would like to deal with. We have been told in your affidavit, the second affidavit which was made on the 24th of January 1997, that the next morning you found a shotgun in the vicinity.

MR NTULI: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: I merely raise this because in the document we have had placed before us which comes from Romeo Mbambo I'm told, he refers to the shotgun having been lost during the course of the attack.

MR WILLS: It is indeed so. I have no further evidence for this applicant.

ADV PRIOR: Thank you, Mr Chairman, there is no evidence from victims. I haven't been approached by anyone else opposing the matter. I don't intend leading anything further, thank you, Mr Chairman.

MR FALCONER: Mr Chairman, similarly I don't intend to lead any evidence, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: I take it, Mr Wills, your argument is that this was part of the conflict of the past between the rival political factions?

MR WILLS ADDRESSES: Yes, indeed so, Mr Chairperson. The only thing that I'd like to say is that obviously from the papers the issue of self-defence does come up and my advice to issue or to proceed with the amnesty application in this regard was simply that we are not sure whether or not that would succeed and for that reason we also wanted to disclose what had occurred. And I submit that it cannot be seen, with respect, by the Committee that this self-defence situation would be accepted by the court ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Well I have been arguing with my Members that this was self-defence until I heard the applicant's evidence, that he enticed towards the door of the house by telling him that he was ill, unarmed and what have you and then when they were really close he rolled out the grenade at them. It appears to me that he has every prospect of being told he exceeded the bounds of self-defence.

Mr Prior, have you anything to say, can you suggest that this wasn't another one of those incidents that took place in Kwazulu Natal?

ADV PRIOR: Mr Chairman, I think that document from Mr Mbambo is quite clear, it seems to support that and I have nothing further to add.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Falconer?

MR FALCONER: I have no further submissions, thank you, Mr Chairman.

F I N D I N G 21.10.1998

CHAIRPERSON: We have listened to the application brought on behalf of Mr Ntuli, we've had reference to the bundle of papers, Exhibit A and to his evidence. It appears that his application for amnesty arises from an attack on his home on the night of the 26th of August 1992 by a group of armed men.

There appears to be no doubt that at the time there was constant conflict between different political factions or parties in that area. Mr Ntuli has told us that he was a member of Cosatu and was seen by members of the IFP as being an ANC supporter.

He has fairly told us that not only were attacks launched on his house but that he knows of attacks launched on the house of Mrs Ntjale, a Councillor who lived in the same area as him.

We are satisfied that the attack that took place that night was part of the ongoing conflict between political parties striving for dominance in the area.

Mr Ntuli related how during the course of the attack his bodyguard left the house to see what he could do from outside, his two nephews left the house and he was left in the house with Mr Enoch Mzuzu who was suffering badly from the effects of a teargas grenade that had been thrown at them. He became aware of the fact that there were four other people outside the house who were going to continue the attack on the house.

In fearing that they might gain entry and thereafter kill himself and Mr Mzuzu, he made use of a handgrenade that he knew to be in the house, and having enticed the four people to come towards the door of the house he threw the handgrenade or rolled the handgrenade towards them and thereby injured them and caused them to depart.

He is asking for amnesty in respect of the attempted murder of these four persons and the illicit possession of a handgrenade. It appears to us that he has complied with all the requirements of the Act, that this was part of the political struggle and can properly be said to be an act with a political objective.

In those circumstances we GRANT THE APPLICATION IN RESPECT OF THE ILLEGAL POSSESSION OF A HANDGRENADE AND THE ATTEMPTED MURDER OF FOUR PERSONS ON THE 26TH OF AUGUST 1992.

----------------

MR WILLS: As the Committee pleases.

ADV PRIOR: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible]

ADV PRIOR: Yes, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible] position, Mr Prior?

ADV PRIOR: Mr Chairman, the position is that we are unable to proceed with this matter. Firstly, the victims have not arrived at the hearing, there has been some problem fetching them from Empangeni. I also understand from Mr de Klerk that he is not in a position to proceed, he needs to consult further and take statements from potential witness and so forth.

In the circumstances I would recommend that the matter be adjourned to a date to be arranged between Mr de Klerk, myself and possible, Mr Coetzee in Cape Town.

CHAIRPERSON: Will you remain the Evidence Leader for this matter?

ADV PRIOR: Well I'll certainly indicate that to Advocate Mpshe.

CHAIRPERSON: And will you please also indicate that the victims, so-called victims, that is victims, potential witnesses and interested parties took the trouble to come to the hearing on Monday but were informed that they should go to Pinetown and that that was the reason why the matter was adjourned originally, isn't it or am I mixed up?

So there can be no suggestion that they are not here today because they are not interested parties. They have already taken the trouble to come down from a long way away on the occasion they believed the matter would be heard and I think it important to ensure that before the next hearing they are given adequate notice and that proper arrangements are made to make sure they are here and also any witness that the applicant wishes called from what is quite a long way away. It may in fact even be better to hear this particular application in that part of the world, where the witnesses can come and I'm sure there are other cases in that part of the world which warrant a hearing. I must say I feel the purpose of public hearings is to bring the matter before the public.

Well if you look around at what we've had here, half a dozen people. That purpose is not being achieved by having large halls in Durban, a long way away from where these people live and I would ask you, Mr Prior, please to talk to whoever arranges the meetings with a view to, these matters that do involve intimately the members of the local population, that we should go to them rather than drag them down to Pinetown or Durban.

ADV PRIOR: Mr Chairman, I'll certainly convey that to the organisers of the roll, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well, you understand we cannot proceed with your hearing today. Now this is the second time that it's had to be adjourned and I do apologise to you for that fact, but we now will arrange for the matter to be set down on a date convenient to the witnesses and to your lawyer and to yourself and we hope we can do that in the not too distant future, thank you.

The matter is adjourned to a date to be arranged after consultation with all parties.