DATE: 10TH NOVEMBER 1999

--------------------------------------------------------------------------CHAIRPERSON: For the record, it's Wednesday the 10th of November 1999. We are continuing with the hearings of the Amnesty Committee, at JISS Centre in Johannesburg. The Panel is constituted as has been indicated on the record. We will be hearing this morning, the applications of T G Tholwe, amnesty reference AM1333/96 and A J M Motloung, amnesty reference AM1325/96.

I want the parties to put themselves on record. Ms Makhubele?

MS MAKHUBELE: I'm Advocate T A Makhubele, from the Pretoria Bar, representing the applicants.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Ms Vilakazi?

MS VILAKAZI: For the Nkwane family, I'm Advocate L E Vilakazi.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Ms Mtanga?

MS MTANGA: I am Lula Mtanga, the Evidence Leader.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much. Yes, Ms Makhubele, is there anything else you want to put on record, or do you want to present the evidence of your clients?

MS MAKHUBELE: Yes, Mr Chairman, before I start there is something which I wish to place on record.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MS MAKHUBELE: I've received instructions for two applicants, Tsietsi Gideon Tholwe and Andries Motloung, and there is an implicated person, John Mokirie Kekana, whom I've also consulted. He has received a notification and I've verified with - he has received a notification as if he is an applicant. I verified with Ms Mtanga and she informed me that the notice to him was issued by mistake, that he has not applied for amnesty and I don't what the position will be, whether he remains an implicated person or if he should be one of the applicants. He is here, I have already consulted with him.

CHAIRPERSON: Well no, if he hasn't applied then he would be an interested party in the proceedings. So at this stage we only have the applications of Mr Tholwe and Mr Motloung before us.

MS MAKHUBELE: Thank you, Mr Chairman. I will proceed first with the application of Tsietsi.

CHAIRPERSON: Tholwe?

MS MAKHUBELE: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Which one of the two is it? Alright. Mr Tholwe, just switch on your microphone. Just touch the red button there. Do you hear the interpretation on your headset?

MR THOLWE: Yes, I do.

CHAIRPERSON: Alright. Now you are going to have to stand to take the oath, so please just stand before you settle down. Give us your full names for the record.

GIDEON TSIETSI THOLWE: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Alright, now you may sit down. Come a bit closer to the mike. Move your seat in a bit. Yes, Ms Makhubele.

MS MAKHUBELE: Mr Chairman, I will just lead the evidence of the applicant.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

EXAMINATION BY MS MAKHUBELE: Mr Tholwe, you are the applicant in this matter.

MR THOLWE: That's correct.

MS MAKHUBELE: How old are you?

MR THOLWE: I'm 27 years old.

MS MAKHUBELE: Where do you reside?

MR THOLWE: Sorry?

MR LAX: Just hang on. Can you hear the interpretation?

INTERPRETER: It seems there's a problem with the receiver there.

MR LAX: Ian, just check the volume.

MS MAKHUBELE: Where do you reside, Mr Tholwe?

MR THOLWE: I stay in Fochsville, at the township known as Kokosi.

MS MAKHUBELE: Is that the place you grew up?

MR THOLWE: That's correct.

MS MAKHUBELE: How far did you go with your education?

MR THOLWE: In standard six.

MS MAKHUBELE: I'm sorry, Mr Chairman, I can't hear the interpretation.

MR LAX: You need to be on channel 3, if you want to hear the interpretation. Let me just check the volume. Can you hear now?

MS MAKHUBELE: Yes, I can.

MR LAX: Thanks.

MS MAKHUBELE: You said how far did you go with your education?

MR THOLWE: Up to standard six.

MS MAKHUBELE: When was this?

MR THOLWE: That was in 1986.

MS MAKHUBELE: On the 13th of March 1992, at Potchesfstroom, you were convicted of murder, is this correct?

MR THOLWE: That's correct.

MS MAKHUBELE: You were sentenced to 10 years, 3 years suspended for 5 years.

MR THOLWE: That's correct.

MS MAKHUBELE: You were released on parole, is this correct?

MR THOLWE: That's correct.

MS MAKHUBELE: When was this?

MR THOLWE: I was released in 1996, on the 13th of March.

MS MAKHUBELE: It's in respect of this conviction that you are here today to apply for amnesty, is this correct?

MR THOLWE: That's correct.

MS MAKHUBELE: At some stage in your life you got involved in political activities, can you tell us when and what motivated you?

MR THOLWE: I started politics in 1990. There was no violence in Kokosi at that time. There were comrades from Kutsong who came to Kokosi and there was violence in Kutsong, because comrades were fighting against the vigilante groups. The comrades from Kutsong ran away from Kutsong to Kokosi and they asked help from us and then we accommodated them because they were our fellow comrades.

MS MAKHUBELE: Yes. Your involvement there, what ultimately happened, which political organisation did you join?

MR THOLWE: I joined the ANC. When we launched the ANC at Kokosi, it was in 1990, we were helped by the comrades from Kutsong. They were the people who motivated us to launch the ANC branch in Kokosi because there was no other political organisations in Kokosi. That is when we started launching the ANC, in 1990.

MS MAKHUBELE: After you launched the ANC at Kokosi and you say that you helped the youth at Kutsong, what political situation then arose in your community, that's Kokosi? Because initially you say there was no politics in Kokosi.

MR THOLWE: Violence erupted after our President, that is Mr Nelson Mandela, was released from prison. We had arranged transport from Kokosi to FNB Stadium to meet President Mandela and the police from Fochsville started the violence. Fochsville was a very small township, so we had no chance at that time that we could go ahead with our political activities.

After the release of our President, violence started at Kokosi and the police were against the comrades. More especially we were the people who were the leaders of the community at Kokosi. We ran to Kutsong because we were not safe at our homes in Kokosi. After we ran to Kutsong we were accommodated there. We were not free at Kutsong, because there was also violence there. We had to hide ourselves. We stayed at a certain shack. We ultimately became victims of vigilante groups because we were helping the comrades from Kutsong.

MS MAKHUBELE: So ultimately your organisation was fighting with the police and the vigilante groups. What position were you holding in that organisation?

MR THOLWE: When we launched the organisation I did not have a position, I only had a position after some time when I was elected to serve in the Disciplinary Committee.

MS MAKHUBELE: The incident that led to your conviction was the killing of one, Fanie Nkwane, for which you are applying for amnesty today. Did you know Fanie Nkwane?

MR THOLWE: Yes, I did.

MS MAKHUBELE: How did you know him?

MR THOLWE: Before he joined the vigilante group he was a member of the ANC and he was one of the people who ran from Kutsong to Kokosi and we accommodated him at Kokosi. That's how I knew him.

MS MAKHUBELE: How did you know that he changed allegiances from ANC to vigilantes?

MR THOLWE: Other comrades who were from Kutsong who came to Fochsville gave us this information that Fanie Nkwane was no longer a comrade, he is now a member of the vigilante group, so we should be careful.

MS MAKHUBELE: Can you describe the events on the day Fanie Nkwane was killed, and your role.

MR THOLWE: Fanie was killed in 1991, it was on the 25th of January. I was contacted by the late Comrade Nororo, he was sent by John Kekana to come and fetch me. Comrade Nororo came to my place, but he did not find me, I was at the shop with other comrades. When I arrived at John Kekana's place he was there together with Andries Motloung and the late Thabang and Lucky Molefe.

The deceased was there and when I entered they were busy interrogating the deceased and I also joined them in interrogating him. I asked him whether he knew me and then said I am Tsietsi. I asked him about the rumours that we have heard that he has now joined the vigilante group in Kutsong. I asked him whether that is true. He did not hesitate and he told me openly that he was a vigilante and he's not one of those people who want to kill us.

There was another lady by the name of Marinkie. Before the deceased was captured this lady came to Kokosi. She was also from Kutsong. The deceased mentioned her name and thereafter he said there was a lady by the name Marinkie and she was sent by the vigilante to come and to spy on us and inform them of our hiding places.

Then we went to fetch that lady and she was asked questions about what we have been told by the deceased. She refused and she told us she didn't know anything about that. She also told us that the deceased came to Kokosi to get information about our hide-outs at Kokosi, because the deceased knew our homes where we lived, so he came to get more information about our hiding places so that he could call his vigilante members.

Our decision, a decision that we took was that because he was telling us the truth we decided that because he joined the vigilante group it is not possible for him to say he's not against us and for the fact that he knew our hiding places ...(intervention)

MS MAKHUBELE: Before you proceed, you said you were interrogating, who was doing the interrogation?

MR THOLWE: When I entered that shack those people that I found in the shack were the people who were interrogating him, asking him questions. At that stage the person who was busy asking him questions is the late Thabang, and then after Thabang, I also started asking him questions as well.

MS MAKHUBELE: So you say a decision was taken, by whom?

MR THOLWE: We took a collective decision that the deceased should be killed because we had already arrived at that decision. That was when we got the information that he belonged to the vigilante group. All of us as comrades, we decided that any vigilante member that we find in Kokosi, should be killed because it was also their intention to kill us.

So we took a collective decision that we are going to take him and kill him. We took him from John Kekana's place and then we went to the forest next to the river and then we started assaulting him and we threw him into the river.

MS MAKHUBELE: What did you do yourself?

MR THOLWE: I had an axe with me, so I hacked him with that axe.

MS MAKHUBELE: When you left him, or when you threw him in the river, was he still alive?

MR THOLWE: I cannot say with certainty whether he was still alive or not.

MS MAKHUBELE: As you indicated earlier on that you were a member of this ANC Youth League, do you know if killing people that are fighting against you, like vigilantes, was the policy of that organisation?

MR THOLWE: I had a different view that as ANC members, when we kill people we should burn them but by that time when we killed the deceased it was late, so we didn't have enough time to burn him, so we decided that we should throw him into the river so that no-one should know who killed him. The reason why the people didn't know that we killed him - we knew that the people will come and the other vigilante members will also come to attack us because they were not arming themselves with knives like we used to do, they were arming themselves with guns.

MS MAKHUBELE: What happened to this woman, Marinkie, the one you also interrogated?

MR THOLWE: Marinkie was released when we left with the deceased and then she went back to her place.

MS MAKHUBELE: You are here today to ask this Tribunal to forgive you, how do you feel about the killing of this person, Fanie Nkwane?

MR THOLWE: The way we knew Fanie Nkwane, the way we worked with him and in many instances he was the person who used to motivate us, we did not expect that Fanie Nkwane would leave the ANC and join the vigilante group. For me to kill Fanie Nkwane, it was not my intention to kill him I would say. The reason why I killed him was that he joined dangerous people, people who were working together with the police, so I had no choice. I knew that if I leave Fanie Nkwane it will be the same, even if I kill him it will be the same, so I decided also that Fanie Nkwane should be killed. I hacked him with my axe.

So today as I'm asking for forgiveness for what I did to Fanie Nkwane, I'm not happy about that, I'm not feeling well about that. Always in prison when I think where we come from with Fanie Nkwane, the way he used to help us, I felt that it would be important for me to come and express my feelings here before Fanie Nkwane's family, so that they could know how their child was killed.

MS MAKHUBELE: What can you tell them now? Any words you can say to the parents to express how you feel?

MR THOLWE: To his parents I would say, what happened really affected me because he used to be my friend before. For me to join politics was because of Fanie Nkwane. I will ask his parents that what happened, happened during the time when we had no choice, we had no other way to avoid those things that happened then. So I would ask them to forgive me for what I did. Yes, I agree that I did that, but now I regret for what I did.

MS MAKHUBELE: You are back in the community now, what are you doing for a living, or are you back to school?

MR THOLWE: I am back in the community. There is nothing that I am doing for a living because when I left school it was because of financial problems that I had then. I still have those problems even today. I've been unable to find any job since I was released from prison. I stay with my mother. I don't have a father, so my mother is married to another person. She's the only person who is helping me with food and other things.

MS MAKHUBELE: Thank you, Mr Tholwe. Thank you, Mr Chairman, that's the applicant's evidence.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Vilakazi, have you got any questions?

MS VILAKAZI: Honourable Chair, I have some questions, but before I go onto my questions, I'd like to put it on record that my instructions are that the Nkwane family is no opposed to the application as such, they are willing to reconcile, but they want the whole truth to be put on the table, they want to understand why their son had to be killed.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MS VILAKAZI: So it's on that basis that I will be conducting my cross-examination.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Please go ahead.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS VILAKAZI: Tsietsi, from what you have been saying I get the impression that you knew Fanie very well, is that correct?

MR THOLWE: That's correct.

MS VILAKAZI: When did you know him?

MR THOLWE: I knew Fanie late 1989, that was before we launched the ANC branch. He was one of the people who used to come to Fochsville, so we used to meet at places like shebeens and taverns etc.

MS VILAKAZI: In which location did you meet?

MR THOLWE: We used to meet at Kokosi.

MS VILAKAZI: So are you saying you met him at the tavern? The first time you saw Fanie was at a tavern, is that what you're saying?

MR THOLWE: It was at the tavern, but at that time at Fochsville there was no political activity. We were not friends before we were involved in politics. I only knew him as Fanie and he knew me as Tsietsi as well.

MS VILAKAZI: I don't seem to understand you well. You spoke about meeting him at a tavern and then you didn't know him politically. How did you get to know him, that's what I want to know.

MR THOLWE: There were other boys who lived in Mageza Street, so I knew those boys. Fanie used to visit those boys and those boys knew me as well.

MS VILAKAZI: So he visited them in Kokosi township, is that correct?

MR THOLWE: Fanie used to visit them at Kokosi.

MS VILAKAZI: Was he related to those boys? Do you know if he was related to them?

MR THOLWE: Well I cannot say with certainty whether they were relatives, but he used to come to the township and he used to visit those boys.

MS VILAKAZI: Okay. But then you met him around 1989, is that correct?

MR THOLWE: That's correct.

MS VILAKAZI: Then at some stage you became close to him, is that correct?

MR THOLWE: We became friends when we were involved in politics.

MS VILAKAZI: So it's politics which brought you closer together?

MR THOLWE: That's correct.

MS VILAKAZI: You have testified that you learnt later that he had joined a vigilante group, when was that? In which year was that?

MR THOLWE: That is the vigilante group in Kutsong.

MS VILAKAZI: My question is in which year was that, in which year did you learn that Fanie had joined a vigilante group?

MR THOLWE: I learnt that in 1990.

MS VILAKAZI: Can you remember the month, is it possible for you to remember which month it was?

MR THOLWE: I do not remember the month, but it was in the late 1990.

MS VILAKAZI: Okay, but then the killing happened in 1991, is that correct? In January 1991.

MR THOLWE: That's correct.

MS VILAKAZI: And it was at the end of January 1991, is that correct?

MR THOLWE: That's correct.

MS VILAKAZI: So it means that some time passed between the time when you learnt that he had joined a vigilante group and the date of the killing, is that correct?

MV THOLWE: That's correct.

MS VILAKAZI: Now as a person that you've been close to, what attempts did you make to try and talk to him to dissuade him from his involvement with the vigilante groups?

MR THOLWE: After learning that he has joined the vigilante group he was no longer a regular visitor at Kokosi and then he went to Kutsong. We could no longer see each other as we used to before.

MS VILAKAZI: Do you mean that you lost contact with him?

MR THOLWE: Yes, I would say so.

MS VILAKAZI: Okay. You've also testified that at some stage when violence erupted in Kokosi you fled the township and you went to stay in Kutsong, is that correct?

MR THOLWE: That's correct.

MS VILAKAZI: When was that?

MR THOLWE: When we fled to Kutsong, I would say it was around April. That is when we ran to Kutsong for the first time because white people did not allow us to stay in Fochsville, so we fled to Kutsong.

MS VILAKAZI: You said April, which year was that?

MR THOLWE: That is 1990.

MS VILAKAZI: And then how long did you stay in Kutsong?

MR THOLWE: We did not finish a week in Kutsong. I would say we stayed there three to four days because we were not comfortable in Kutsong.

MS VILAKAZI: Did you ever return to Kutsong at a later stage?

MR THOLWE: After that I went to Kutsong for the second time because we were fleeing to Kutsong because of violence in Kokosi.

MS VILAKAZI: When was that and how long did you stay, in that period?

MR THOLWE: We fled to Kutsong. I do not recall the month, but it was on Friday when we fled to Kutsong and then we came back on Sunday.

MS VILAKAZI: So you're saying that your stay in Kutsong was very short, is that correct? In both instances when you fled to Kutsong it was very short?

MR THOLWE: That's correct.

MS VILAKAZI: At that time did you have any contact with Fanie?

MR THOLWE: I was unable to meet Fanie at those instances. I only met him when we fled to Kutsong for the first time. That was before he joined the vigilante group.

MS VILAKAZI: But now, I just want to understand clearly. You were fleeing from Kutsong and you had this - from Kokosi, and you had this comrade called Fanie, who you were close to, why did you not attempt to - and you were not comfortable where you were accommodated, why did you not contact Fanie to accommodate you? Because as a comrade he would have been willing to do so.

MR THOLWE: Where we used to stay at that squatter camp in Kutsong, we hid ourselves in a shack, so we were many in that shack, so it was not easy for Fanie to take me to his place because he was also not staying at his place because he was wanted as well.

MS VILAKAZI: But how do you know that he was not staying at his place, because you have said that you lost contact with him?

MR THOLWE: Your question was that the first time when we fled to Kutsong, were we not meeting with Fanie to accommodate us, so what I'm saying is that for the first time when we fled to Kutsong we met Fanie and I knew where he stayed and I was sure that he was not staying at his place and most of the time he(?) used to stay at the squatter camp.

MS VILAKAZI: You still haven't answered my question. You have said earlier on that you had lost contact with Fanie, so at the time when you went to Kutsong, my question was, why did you not make attempts to contact Fanie? You have not answered that question.

MR LAX: Sorry, Ms Vilakazi, he did in fact qualify his answer to say that on the first time he fled there, Fanie was not yet a vigilante and he said that he only lost contact with him after he became a vigilante. So there might be some misunderstanding there, maybe you can clear that up first. That was his testimony.

MS VILAKAZI: Okay, maybe I should rephrase my question.

When you fled to Kutsong the first time, Fanie was not yet a vigilante. That is what you said, is that correct?

MR THOLWE: That's correct.

MS VILAKAZI: Did you try to contact him to arrange for him to accommodate you?

MR THOLWE: When we fled to Kutsong for the first time, he was at Kutsong, so we met him at the place where they used to hide.

MS VILAKAZI: So you did have contact with him.

MR THOLWE: When we fled to Kutsong, Fanie didn't know that we would arrive at Kutsong. We left Fochsville to Kutsong. He did not know, and that's when we met him there. Because he did not expect us, we did not talk about the accommodation. We stayed in a shack. The ANC Youth League used to stay in the squatter camp.

MS VILAKAZI: Okay, let's leave that for a while. On the day of the murder, do you remember what day it was, what day in the week it was?

MR THOLWE: You mean the day of the killing? It was on Friday.

MS VILAKAZI: Where did you get Fanie? The killing happened in Kokosi - let's put the record straight, the killing happened in Kokosi, is that correct?

MR THOLWE: That's correct.

MS VILAKAZI: So where did you get hold of Fanie?

MR THOLWE: He was brought by John Kekana. When I asked him where he got Fanie, he said to me he met him at Kijima Street and then he took him to his place. John Kekana also stayed in Kijima Street. So he took him to his shack and then he sent Nororo to my place to call me.

MS VILAKAZI: So at that time did you know what Nororo was calling you for?

MR THOLWE: Nororo said to me, and then he said Seun wants to see me, he is with Fanie at his shack.

MS VILAKAZI: Where did the interrogation take place?

MR THOLWE: We were in the shack, Mr Kekana's shack.

MS VILAKAZI: Okay. You are saying that Fanie was a member of a vigilante group, now I'm putting it to you that according to my instructions he was never involved with any other political organisation except the ANC. What is your comment?

MR THOLWE: The way you put it when you say he was not a member of the vigilante group, he was only the member of the ANC, I would dispute that because Fanie accepted that he was a member of the vigilante group, but he was not intending to kill us.

MS VILAKAZI: I'm also putting it to you that you were friends, it is confirmed that you and Fanie were friends, so you knew each other very well and that Fanie never fled from his home, he only went to visit his grandmother in Fochsville and that is where you collected him on the day of the killing. What is your comment?

MR THOLWE: I'm unable to answer that because I found the deceased at John Kekana's place. When John Kekana went to fetch him I wasn't present.

MS VILAKAZI: I'm also putting it to you that it is strange that a person who has been friends with Fanie, as you claim and as it is confirmed, that you would be ready to believe that he has joined a vigilante group and make no effort whatsoever to persuade him to rejoin the ANC, more specifically because of the fact that he was the one who persuaded you to join the ANC in the first place. What is your comment?

MR THOLWE: I was unable to persuade Fanie to rejoin the ANC because he was already a member of the vigilante group. If we had tried to persuade him to rejoin the ANC, I would not be sure that when we release him he'll go back to the vigilante group and tell them about us or whether he will understand when we persuade him to rejoin the ANC. So we were not sure about that, that is why we ended up taking that decision that we took, that he should be killed.

MS VILAKAZI: No, I'm not talking about the other members of the group, I'm talking about you specifically as a friend to Fanie, tlat you did not make any effort to persuade him to rejoin the ANC, and that is very strange.

MR THOLWE: I did not take any initiative to persuade him. That is because the vigilante's were very dangerous. I did not trust that even if I could take those initiatives to persuade him to rejoin the ANC, what would happen to me.

MS VILAKAZI: I'm putting it to you that you did not make any effort to talk to Fanie because you knew that he was an ANC member and not a member of the vigilante group.

MR THOLWE: What made me believe that he was a vigilante was because when I asked him the question, when I asked him why he has left the ANC to join the vigilante group, he said to me "I am a member of the vigilante group, but I'm not against you". That is the Kokosi comrades. So I did not trust what he said begause he could not be a member of the vigilante group and at the same time claim that he is not intending to attack us. And we had already heard what he said, that the vigilantes had sent Marinkie to come and spy on us. We also heard again from Marinkie that he was sent to come and get information about us and take it back to the vigilante group.

MS VILAKAZI: Now how well did you know this Marinkie?

MR THOLWE: She used to visit in Kijima Street and that place where she used to visit is not far away from my place. We used to stay in four-roomed houses. Where she stayed she stayed - we were only separated by one four-roomed house. I would say it can be five metres from my home to where she used to visit.

MS VILAKAZI: Was Marinkie politically active?

MR THOLWE: She was a lady - according to the deceased, Marinkie was also a member of the vigilante group, she was used by the vigilante group as a spy for them. She would gather information about our hide-out and then she would take that information and take it back to the members of the vigilante groups.

MS VILAKAZI: So the only information you have about Marinkie's political affiliation is what you were told by the deceased, is that correct?

MR THOLWE: That's correct.

MS VILAKAZI: And you believed the deceased, is that correct?

MR THOLWE: That's correct.

MS VILAKAZI: Now if you believed the deceased, why did you release Marinkie and kill the deceased? More so because one, you believed the deceased when he said that she belonged to a vigilante group and therefore your perception was that members of the vigilante group are a threat to yourselves, and secondly, you did not believe the deceased when he said he did not want to kill you, you were not among the people that he wanted to kill despite the fact that he's also in a vigilante group. So why did you release Marinkie?

MR THOLWE: The way the deceased told us about Marinkie, both of them, the deceased and Marinkie gave us different explanations and Marinkie was stressing the fact that the deceased was a member of the vigilante group and she was not sent by that group to spy on us. They were arguing against each other and I decided that what Fanie was saying, he was just not telling us the truth when he said he was a vigilante, but he was not against us. So I thought that he just wanted to escape, that's why we released Marinkie.

MS VILAKAZI: I have no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Ms Mtanga, have you got any questions?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS MTANGA: Yes, Chairperson, I've got one question.

Mr Tholwe, what political affiliation was this vigilante group, do you know?

MR THOLWE: This vigilante group was not linked to any political organisation as far as I know.

MS MTANGA: According to page 1 of your application, paragraph 9A(1), you indicated that you were convicted for murdering an Azanian Student Organisation comrade. Can you explain why did you write that if the vigilante group did not belong to any political organisation? Why did you write that kind of information?

MR THOLWE: I think it is because when I made this application in Potchefstroom, there was somebody who was helping me, so we used to refer to this vigilante group as AmaZimzim, because we used to criticise each other, ourselves and Azanian organisations. So those people who belonged to such organisations, we referred to them as AmaZimzim. So even the deceased's group before we knew that they were a vigilante group, we used to refer to them as AmaZimzim. It was after we have found that they were vigilante and not AmaZimzim, and then I was just trying to say it was the same thing. When they were called AmaZimzim, I thought that it's an organisation.

MS MTANGA: So are you saying today that the vigilantes were not affiliated to the Azanian Students Organisation, which was at that time called AmaZimzim?

MR THOLWE: No, they were not linked to that.

MS MTANGA: At what point did you believe that the vigilantes were AmaZimzim, or were affiliated to the Azanian Students Organisation?

MR THOLWE: The way I know Kutsong, I don't remember hearing that there was an Azanian organisation there.

MS MTANGA: Did you differentiate between the Azanian Students Organisation and AmaZimzim? Was there a difference, as far as you understood it?

MR THOLWE: Can you please repeat your question.

MS MTANGA: I'm asking you, in your understanding of the situation then, wes there a difference between the Azanian Students Organisation and AmaZimzim? Because you are saying to me, at Fochsville the Azanian Students Organisation did not exist, but you were referring to the vigilantes as AmaZimzim. So I'm asking you, did you appreciate that there was, was there a difference in your understand, of the AmaZimzim and the Azanian Students Organisation? Were they one thing or were they different?

MR THOLWE: There was a difference. There was a difference because the reason why they were called AmaZimzim according to me, is because they were against the ANC and there was nothing that showed they belonged to an organisation because they were working hand-in-hand with the police, so we did not view them as a political party. They were working with the police, they were all against the ANC. It was a group that was formed to be against the ANC.

MS MTANGA: Thank you, Chairperson, no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Ms Mtanga. Panel?

MR LAX: No questions, Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Re-examination?

MR SIBANYONI: Just one, Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, just a minute.

MR SIBANYONI: What were their ages, this group you are talking about?

MR THOLWE: Their ages varied, there were also adults in that group.

MR SIBANYONI: What was the majority, was the majority youth or adults?

MR THOLWE: The majority were youth.

MR SIBANYONI: Thank you, Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Re-examination?

MS MAKHUBELE: None, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Tholwe, you are excused. Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: I assume you're calling Mr Motloung.

MS MAKHUBELE: Yes, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Motloung, just come and sit here where Mr Tholwe was sitting now. Whilst you're there just remain standing and give us your full names.

MR MOTLOUNG: ...(indistinct) Johnny Mokete Motloung.

CHAIRPERSON: What are the names, Mr Interpreter?

MR MOTLOUNG: That's Andries Johnny Mokete Motloung.

ANDRIES JOHNNY MOKETE MOTLOUNG: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, you can be seated. Ms Makhubele?

EXAMINATION BY MS MAKHUBELE: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

Mr Motloung, you are an applicant in this matter.

MR MOTLOUNG: That's correct.

MS MAKHUBELE: When were you born?

MR MOTLOUNG: In 1972.

INTERPRETER: Pardon, Chairperson, there seems to be a problem with his receiver.

MS MAKHUBELE: You were born in 1972, you ...(intervention)

INTERPRETER: May you please repeat the question, I was just trying to find out whether he speaks Sotho or Tswana.

MS MAKHUBELE: Okay, you said you were born in 1972, you are 27 years old now.

MR MOTLOUNG: That's correct.

MS MAKHUBELE: Where did you grow up?

MR MOTLOUNG: At Kokosi.

MS MAKHUBELE: You're still living there?

MR MOTLOUNG: That's correct.

MS MAKHUBELE: How far did you go at school?

MR MOTLOUNG: In standard, but I was in jail then.

MS MAKHUBELE: You only completed standard eight, when?

MR MOTLOUNG: In 1993

MS MAKHUBELE: On the 13th of March 1992, at Potchefstroom, you were convicted of murder and you were sentenced to 10 years, 2 suspended for 5 years, is this correct?

MR MOTLOUNG: That's correct.

MS MAKHUBELE: You have been released on parole, can you tell us when?

MR MOTLOUNG: I was released in 1997, on the 13th of March.

MS MAKHUBELE: How many years had you served of your sentence?

MR MOTLOUNG: 5 years.

MS MAKHUBELE: Somewhere in your life before your conviction you got involved in politics, can you tell us when and which political organisation you were involved in.

MR MOTLOUNG: I joined politics in 1990. I joined the ANC Youth League at Kokosi.

MS MAKHUBELE: What motivated you?

MR MOTLOUNG: What motivated me to join politics was the situation under which we lived under white people at that place. After Nelson Mandela was released from prison we were happy about that, but after that the white people were attacking us, spraying us with the teargas because they were not happy about the release of our President, and that showed me that they were not happy when we are happy for the release of our leader. So they were spraying us with teargas and that motivated me to join a political organisation so that I could fight against those people who were oppressing the black people.

MS MAKHUBELE: Did you have any position in that organisation?

MR MOTLOUNG: I was just an additional member.

MS MAKHUBELE: Other than the fact that police sprayed you with teargas when you were happy, what was the climate then, political climate, was there any violence for example and things like that?

MR MOTLOUNG: No, before Nelson Mandela was released from prison, Kokosi was a quiet place and there were no political organisations there.

MS MAKHUBELE: Obviously things changed. When and after what happened?

MR MOTLOUNG: The situation changed when white properties were burnt and that's what started the violence because we viewed their properties as our targets.

MS MAKHUBELE: So you burnt them.

MR MOTLOUNG: That's correct.

MS MAKHUBELE: In retaliation did anything happen to you as an organisation?

MR MOTLOUNG: We were arrested under the State of Emergency and detained for about three months.

MS MAKHUBELE: Okay, let's come to the incident that led to your conviction. According to the documents you were convicted for killing one, Fanie Nkwane. Did you know him?

MR MOTLOUNG: Yes, I did kill Fanie Nkwane.

MS MAKHUBELE: Before you killed him did you know him?

MR MOTLOUNG: Yes, I did.

MS MAKHUBELE: Personally, or how did you come to know Fanie?

MR MOTLOUNG: I knew Fanie in Kutsong because I attended school in Kutsong. He used to live next to where my grandmother was in Kutsong. I used to see him as an individual and I knew his name, but we were not involved in politics then. And then we became much closer when he came to our township to visit his grandmother, but we had nothing that we would discuss together.

I started talking to him in 1990, when he came with other boys. They fled from Kutsong to our township. That was the first time that I did talk to Fanie.

MS MAKHUBELE: What were they feeing from?

MR MOTLOUNG: There was violence in Kutsong. They were attacked and shot by white people because they were burning those targets.

MS MAKHUBELE: Was this after you had formed in Kokosi?

MR MOTLOUNG: That's correct. I knew him personally after we have launched an ANC branch in Kokosi.

MS MAKHUBELE: On the day that Fanie was killed, the 25th of January 1991, what happened?

MR MOTLOUNG: On the 25th of January 1991, I had visited my girlfriend, that is in Kijima Street. While I was still there, Nororo came to me and he said to me John Kekana wants to see me, he is with Fanie at his shack, then I said to my girlfriend that I'm coming.

I went to that shack and when I entered Kekana's shack the deceased was there together with the late Thabang, and I asked John Kekana where he got Fanie and then he said to me "I met him in my street when I was going to work".

Then I sat down and I started asking Fanie questions, because before I asked him questions I was intending to go to Kutsong because I had already learnt that Fanie was now a vigilante and I also saw him in the company of other members of the vigilante.

I started asking him questions as to why he had left the organisation to join the vigilante. He said to me those people wanted to kill him, that is why he joined them because he wanted to protect himself so that he could not be killed. So I asked him "Why are you coming to Fochsville"? Then he said to me he was coming to collect information from Marinkie, because Marinkie was sent here by the vigilante group to spy on us. ...(intervention)

MS MAKHUBELE: Can you slow down a bit please.

MR MOTLOUNG: He said to us that he was coming to collect information from Marinkie and take it back to Kutsong, because Marinkie was sent to Kutsong to collect information.

MS MAKHUBELE: You said - who was there when you got to John's place?

MR MOTLOUNG: It was John Kekana and the late Thabang.

MS MAKHUBELE: Only?

MR MOTLOUNG: That's correct.

MS MAKHUBELE: And who else arrived after your arrival?

MR MOTLOUNG: After my arrival Lucky arrived and then after him Tsietsi Tholwe arrived and another guy called Oupa.

MS MAKHUBELE: What position was this John Kekana? In what position was he in the ANC Youth League?

MR MOTLOUNG: John Kekana was in the Disciplinary Committee of the ANC Youth League.

MS MAKHUBELE: After Fanie was asked questions, what happened?

MR MOTLOUNG: After we had asked him questions we took a decision that Fanie should be killed because we knew that he was always in the company of the vigilante group and we knew that that group was very dangerous, so we knew if we release him those people will come back and they will kill us because he will give them information about our hide-outs.

MS MAKHUBELE: Did you decide how he was to be killed?

MR MOTLOUNG: Yes, we did. We took a decision that he should be burnt, but because it was already late, we then took a decision not to burn him because the people will recognise the light. So we wanted to kill him so that the people should not know who killed him.

MS MAKHUBELE: So what did you do then to achieve that?

MR MOTLOUNG: We took him to the river ...(intervention)

MS MAKHUBELE: Was he walking on his own?

MR MOTLOUNG: Yes, he was walking on his own, but we were surrounding him. He was not screaming he was quiet. When we arrived at the river we started stabbing him.

MS MAKHUBELE: How did you stab him, or did you stab him at all?

MR MOTLOUNG: Yes, I did.

MS MAKHUBELE: With what?

MR MOTLOUNG: I stabbed him with a knife that we used to call Rambo.

MS MAKHUBELE: Do you know how many other people stabbed him, other than yourself?

MR MOTLOUNG: It was myself, Tsietsi, Lucky, Thabang, who is now deceased, Oupa.

MS MAKHUBELE: After stabbing him, what did you do with him?

MR MOTLOUNG: We pushed him into the river.

MS MAKHUBELE: Was he already dead?

MR MOTLOUNG: I'm not certain about that.

MS MAKHUBELE: Do you know if it was your organisation's policy to kill people and what kind of people were to be killed?

MR MOTLOUNG: I would not say it was the policy of the organisation but what I would say is, the circumstances at that time, because we realised that the vigilante groups and the police were well armed and the police were not investigating the cases about what the vigilante group did, so we decided that the best was to kill them.

MS MAKHUBELE: Who were these vigilantes, were they a political organisation? You said Fanie had left the ANC to join them.

MR MOTLOUNG: I would not say this group was linked to a political organisation, it was just a group that was working hand-in-hand with the police, helping the police to arrest those people who were members of the ANC. Because the police were unable to arrest us, they were using this group of vigilantes to arrest us. So I would not say that it was a political organisation.

MS MAKHUBELE: Other than your political differences with Fanie, did you have any personal fight with him?

MR MOTLOUNG: No. When he joined the vigilante, that is when we were no longer in a good relationship with him.

MS MAKHUBELE: You are now applying for amnesty that you be forgiven for your part in killing Fanie, what can you tell this Tribunal?

MR MOTLOUNG: I've been troubled by this incident even in prison, because I killed somebody who today could help his parents and when I remember those old days, our friendship with Fanie and our political activities, I was always troubled by that in jail and again the fact that his parents did not know what happened to their son, it is really painful to me. I would like to thank Nelson Mandela when he started this TRC, so that we can come forward and ask for forgiveness from those we have wronged.

So through the Truth Commission I would ask forgiveness from Fanie's mother. What I did was not my intention, that is how the situation was at that time of apartheid. I am hurt because I have killed somebody who would be a leader tomorrow. Thank you.

MS MAKHUBELE: Did you know Fanie's parents?

MR MOTLOUNG: No.

MS MAKHUBELE: Thank you, Motloung. Thank you, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Ma'am.

MS VILAKAZI: Yes, I have questions, thank you, Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Go ahead.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS VILAKAZI: Mr Motloung, you say you are very sorry for what you did.

MR MOTLOUNG: That's correct.

MS VILAKAZI: Because you killed someone who would be a leader today.

MR MOTLOUNG: That's correct.

MS VILAKAZI: You feel remorseful for what you did.

MR MOTLOUNG: That's correct.

MS VILAKAZI: And you feel sorry for the family as well.

MR MOTLOUNG: That's correct.

MS VILAKAZI: If that is so, why don't you just tell the family the real reason why Fanie was killed and stop hiding behind this political matter that was not the position?

MR MOTLOUNG: What I can tell Fanie's mother is that Fanie was indeed a member of the vigilante group. Even the people of Kutsong knew that Fanie was a member of the vigilante group. I also saw him with my eyes on two occasions in the company of the members of that vigilante group, and he also said that he was a member of the vigilante. There's no other people again who said that he was a member of the vigilante group except our comrades and himself, Fanie.

MS VILAKAZI: So you persist that Fanie was a member of the vigilante group?

MR MOTLOUNG: That was not perception, I saw him in the company of them.

MS VILAKAZI: You have testified earlier on that before the date of the killing you had wanted to talk to Fanie, you wanted to go to Kutsong to talk to Fanie and ask him why he belongs to the vigilante group. Did I hear you well?

MR MOTLOUNG: No.

MS VILAKAZI: So you've never had an intention of talking to Fanie about his political affiliation?

MR MOTLOUNG: Let me put it this way. Because I knew that Fanie was in the company of people who were very cruel, then I hated Fanie because he was a member of the ANC, we used to burn targets together and I knew that Fanie was a brave person. So I was regarding him as an enemy then.

MS VILAKAZI: I think I heard you well saying that you wanted to Kutsong to ask him, but anyway ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: No, he didn't say he wanted to ask him, he said he wanted to go to Kutsong, but he never gave a reason why. He said, before this day of the killing he wanted to go to Kutsong. He never said he wanted to go and talk to the deceased about his involvement with the vigilantes.

MS VILAKAZI: In that event, I will abandon that line of questioning, thanks Mr Chairman.

Who were your leaders in the ANC at Kokosi?

MR MOTLOUNG: It was Mzwake, he was the President of the ANC Youth League, and the Chairlady was Sheila. Unfortunately I've forgotten her surname. I did not know who held other positions.

MS VILAKAZI: But were there other people in that hierarchy, besides Mzwake and Sheila?

MR MOTLOUNG: Yes.

MS VILAKAZI: Who else was a member of the Committee?

MR MOTLOUNG: There were many but I have forgotten them, I only remember Sheila and Mzwake. I have forgotten who was the Secretary and other positions as well.

MS VILAKAZI: And what was your position?

MR MOTLOUNG: I did not have a position, I was just an additional member.

MS VILAKAZI: Additional member of the Committee?

MR MOTLOUNG: No.

MS VILAKAZI: What do you mean by "additional member"? Do you mean ordinary member of the organisation?

MR MOTLOUNG: Yes, I was just an ordinary member of the organisation.

MS VILAKAZI: But did you understand the functioning of the organisation? You spoke about the Executive Committee and then at some stage you referred to the Disciplinary Committee, who was in the Disciplinary Committee?

MR MOTLOUNG: The Disciplinary Committee comprised of John Kekana, Mr Kholwe, Thabang, Lucky, Oupa and many more others that I have forgotten. I would only mention those that I remember.

MS VILAKAZI: What was the function of the Disciplinary Committee, do you know?

MR MOTLOUNG: I don't know because I was not in the Disciplinary Committee.

MS VILAKAZI: But then if you were not in the Disciplinary Committee, why did you take part in interrogating the deceased? Because apparently it was called by Kekana, who was a member of the Disciplinary Committee and Kholwe was there as a member of the Disciplinary Committee, so why did you take part?

MR MOTLOUNG: I took part because I was concerned about this matter involving Fanie. I knew him very well, I wanted to know and I wanted to ascertain whether he was a member of the vigilante group and he actually said that to me that he was a member of the vigilante group. That is the reason why I took part in asking him questions and that is the reason why I took his life as well.

MS VILAKAZI: When did he tell you that he's a member of the vigilante group?

MR MOTLOUNG: That is the time when we asked him questions in that shack. He said that to me while I was asking him questions.

MS VILAKAZI: Ja, but I want to know at the time when you went to be part of this interrogation, you did not know that he was a vigilante and you were not a member of the DC, so what was your reason for taking part?

MR MOTLOUNG: I already knew then that he was a member of the vigilante group because I knew before other people could know that he was a member of the vigilante group, because I heard that when I went to visit my grandmother in Kutsong. I saw him on two occasion in the company of those people and then when I came back to our township I told my fellow comrades that he has joined the vigilante group.

MS VILAKAZI: I have no further questions, thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Ma'am. Ms Mtanga, any questions?

MS MTANGA: I have no questions, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Panel?

MR SIBANYONI: No questions.

MR LAX: No questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Re-examination?

MS MAKHUBELE: None, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Motloung, you're excused, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that the case for the applicants?

MS MAKHUBELE: Yes, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MS MAKHUBELE: The implicated person is here, I don't know whether the Committee will call him or if I should ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: No, we don't want to call him and I assume you also don't want to call him.

MS MAKHUBELE: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Have you got any witnesses, Ms Vilakazi?

MS VILAKAZI: Just one witness, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, who is that?

MS VILAKAZI: I call Mrs Nkwane, the mother to the deceased.

CHAIRPERSON: Can you call her please? Ms Nkwane, can you come to the witness stand. I suppose she'll have to sit there at that microphone. Mrs Nkwane, just remain standing and can you give us your full names please.

EXAMINATION BY MS VILAKAZI: ... are you in a position to forgive?

MS NKWANE: Yes, I will forgive them.

MS VILAKAZI: I just want to ask you a few questions concerning your son's political activities. Did you know your son, Fanie, to belong to any organisation, political organisation?

MS NKWANE: He was a member of the ANC.

MS VILAKAZI: How did you know that he belonged to the ANC?

MS NKWANE: I knew because we used to go together to attend meetings at the local hall.

MS VILAKAZI: And were those meetings ANC meetings?

MS NKWANE: No, those were the meetings for adults, people who call themselves NAC. - yes, ANC. It's because I don't understand these things, so I think it's ANC.

MS VILAKAZI: But you attended meetings of people who call themselves ANC or NAC, as you understood it, with your son?

MS NKWANE: I would just attend those meetings when I heard that there's a meeting like when Mr Mandela used to come.

MS VILAKAZI: Do you know the emblem of the organisation of Mr Mandela?

MS NKWANE: Yes, I do.

MS VILAKAZI: Do you know what it looks like?

MS NKWANE: It's blue, yellow and black colours.

MS VILAKAZI: Did you son have any type of clothing or anything that had that emblem?

MS NKWANE: No, he never had such clothing.

MS VILAKAZI: Did he have any badges or something of that sort?

MS NKWANE: Yes, he had them. They use to buy them at Power Store.

MS VILAKAZI: Did they look like those of the organisation of Mr Mandela?

MS NKWANE: Yes, although they were not that clear, but they looked like those.

MS VILAKAZI: Is there any time when your son, Fanie, ran away from home because of any reason?

MS NKWANE: No.

MS VILAKAZI: Did your son ever go to Fochsville?

MS NKWANE: Yes, at his grandmother's place.

MS VILAKAZI: At the time of his death - he was killed in Fochsville, do you know he landed there?

MS NKWANE: He told us that he's going to visit his granny on Friday, but he did not come back on Saturday and then on Monday we heard that he's been killed.

MS VILAKAZI: So he left home to go and visit his grandmother in Fochsville.

MS NKWANE: That's correct.

MS VILAKAZI: I have no further questions, thank you, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Ms Vilakazi. Ms Makhubele, have you got any questions?

MS MAKHUBELE: No questions, Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Ms Mtanga?

MS MTANGA: No questions, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Panel?

MR LAX: No questions.

MR SIBANYONI: No questions.

CHAIRPERSON: I assume you don't have anything further.

MS VILAKAZI: Ja, that will be the case, Mr Chairman, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Mrs Nkwane, thank you very much for coming, you're excused.

MS NKWANE: I thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Ms Makhubele, have you got any submissions on the merits of the case? Bearing in mind that it's not being opposed.

MS MAKHUBELE: Yes, Mr Chair, can I just - for both, not individually?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MS MAKHUBELE IN ARGUMENT: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

Mr Chairman, I submit that the applicants have made out a case that their actions comply with the requirements of the Act, not only the requirements, but that they have made a full disclosure. Although I do not have the court records, but from the submissions made by the Attorney-General, one can safely assume that even during their trial some evidence was given which at the end it was found that there was a political motive. And as the Committee has seen the two young men before it, they were also victims in the sense that they were still young, they have lost their youth in that their schooling was interrupted, they have, unlike most applicants, they have already served their due in that they have served their sentences and they are now back in the community and they really want the community to forgive them. That is all that I can state.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Ma'am. Ms Vilakazi, have you got any submissions?

MS VILAKAZI IN ARGUMENT: Thank you, Honourable Chairperson. The only thing that needs to be looked at I submit, is to verify the political objective of the incident. As I had indicated, my instructions were that the deceased was a member of the ANC and he never belonged to any political organisation. It is unfortunate that Mrs Nkwane was not able to verify that coherently, but I think that is understandable ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very much so. Parents are - and I'm speaking from personal experience, parents are always the last to know what their children do.

MS VILAKAZI: But then the picture that has been painted is that the applicants were friends with the deceased and they knew that he was not a member of any other political organisation than the one that they belonged to.

So on that basis I would just leave it to the Committee to use its discretion and to take a decision on that. Thank you, Honourable Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Ms Vilakazi. Ms Mtanga, have you got any submissions?

MS MTANGA: No submissions, Chairperson, I'll leave it in your hands.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. I assume you don't have anything further.

MS MAKHUBELE: No.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Yes, that concludes the formal part of this matter. The Panel will consider the evidence and the applications and will notify the interested parties once the decision is available. So under the circumstances we will reserve the decision in this matter. It just remains for us to thank the legal representatives, Ms Makhubele, Ms Vilakazi, Ms Mtanga, for your assistance in this matter. Thank you very much.

MS VILAKAZI: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

MS MAKHUBELE: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: We will take the tea adjournment at this stage and obviously I assume that Mr Koopedi's matter will then be prepared.

MS MTANGA: Yes, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: We will adjourn for 15 minutes.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------ON RESUMPTION

CHAIRPERSON: For the applicants, Mr Koopedi?

MR KOOPEDI: For all applicants, my name is Brian Koopedi.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Koopedi. Ms Mtanga?

MS MTANGA: I am Lula Mtanga, the Evidence Leader.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Yes, Mr Koopedi.

MR KOOPEDI: Thank you, Chairperson. Chairperson, we have slightly rearranged the order of the applicants. The order in which they will come before you will be that number 4, as on the list, Mr Mzumbe will be the first person to testify, the second one will be number 2, who is Mr Msimango, the third one would be Mr Hlongwane, the fourth one will then be Mr Patose.

Before you here is Mr Mzumbe, who is ready to be sworn in, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Koopedi. Mr Mzumbe, do you hear the interpretation on your headset? Is it working?

MR MZUMBE: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Good. Yes, will you please stand. Are your full names Sibulelo Goodman Mzumbe?

SIBULELO GOODMAN MZUMBE: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: You may be seated, and just pull your chair in a bit. Mr Koopedi?

EXAMINATION BY MR KOOPEDI: Thank you, Chairperson.

Mr Mzumbe, is it correct that you are a co-applicant in this matter and that your application appears on page 24 of the bundle of documents before this Honourable Committee?

MR MZUMBE: Yes, that is correct.

MR KOOPEDI: Is it correct that you are applying for amnesty for an incident involving the attack on one, Johannes Selai, which occurred on the 29th of July 1992?

MR MZUMBE: Yes.

MR KOOPEDI: Now could you kindly tell this Honourable Committee where you were on the evening of the said date.

MR MZUMBE: I was at the Checkers Tavern. Would you like me to explain everything?

MR KOOPEDI: Ja, please proceed.

MR MZUMBE: We were at the Checkers Tavern, drinking on that particular day - on that night, and people from Kwamadala came and people who were staying there were members of Inkatha Freedom Party.

Whilst we were still drinking there, we heard gunshots, bullet shots that were coming through the window inside the tavern. Other people were shot that were with us in that tavern. We then hid ourselves under the tables.

After that when the shooting stopped, Johannes Selai was with them. He stood next to the door at the tavern, he ordered us to go out one by one. Whilst we were still going out they were beating us. They had firearms, those that were standing outside the tavern. They then grabbed Bennet Msimango because he was wearing a T-shirt that was written "Boipatong Call us to Action". After the members of attacked - it was after they had attacked in the township. We then went out of the tavern one by one and they would kick us while we were still going out of the tavern. They told us to leave that place. I then went back home.

After some time it was quiet and I then went back again. When I went back after some time, when I arrived, Johannes Selai was arrested by the comrades and they were asking him questions, beating him up, saying that he was an informer because he was with the people from the other side and at the time we were fighting with the Inkatha people.

He was asked questions, being beaten up. And I also had a knife with me, I stabbed him. After that there were lots of comrades there and because at the time when you were a member of Inkatha Freedom Party in the township, you would be killed because they were also killing.

So we didn't want them to go to the township because they had already killed a lot of people in the township. I stabbed him in the hand. He was then pulled outside the tavern where petrol was poured over him. He was burnt.

While his body was still burning, the police came and the soldiers, they were shooting. When they came they were already shooting. We dispersed and Johannes was then saved by the soldiers and the police.

Two weeks after the incident I was arrested together with others. We were taken to prison.

MR KOOPEDI: Now during this time, were you a member of a political organisation, a member or a supporter of a political organisation?

MR MZUMBE: At that time I was the supporter of the ANC, because at the township the majority of us were supporting the ANC because it was fighting against Inkatha Freedom Party. When you were a member of Inkatha Freedom Party in the township, you would be killed. We didn't want any people belonging to that organisation in the township because they were also killing people from the township.

MR KOOPEDI: Is it correct that this incident occurred shortly after what came to be known as the Boipatong Massacre?

MR MZUMBE: Yes, that is correct, it happened after the Boipatong massacre. After members of Inkatha Freedom Party attacked in Boipatong, we would group ourselves in different groups so that they cannot get a chance to go again in the township, because they were killing people and we didn't want any member of IFP to go inside the township because you would be labelled as an informer when you are from that side, so you deserved to be killed.

MR KOOPEDI: Now your attack on Mr Selai, what were your intentions, did you intend to kill him?

MR MZUMBE: Yes, because you are an informer in the township you would be killed. Out intention was to kill him, but he was saved by the police and the soldiers that arrived at the time.

MR KOOPEDI: Now your actions on that day, did you receive anything personally, financially or otherwise? Was there any personal gain on your side?

MR MZUMBE: Personally?

MR KOOPEDI: Did you gain anything financially, did anyone pay you, did you get a reward for attacking Mr Selai?

MR MZUMBE: No, we didn't expect money when we were attacking a person. When you were a member of IFP in the township and when we see you in the township, you would be killed, so there was nothing else that we gained, we just wanted to kill the members of the IFP because they were also killing.

MR KOOPEDI: Now you know that for you to obtain amnesty one of the things that you would have to do would be to fully disclose all material facts to this Committee. Do you think that you have disclosed all the material facts?

MR MZUMBE: Yes. Another thing is, he was helped by the police because our intention was to kill him because we were fighting against the IFP at the time, they were killing people. When they were in the township they were killing people, so they were regarded as informers, so if we get hold of an IFP member, we would kill that person so that we can eliminate IFP from attacking the residents of the township.

MR KOOPEDI: Chairperson, that will be the evidence of this witness, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Tlank you, Mr Koopedi. Ms Mtanga, any questions?

MS MTANGA: Yes, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, go ahead.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS MTANGA: Thank you.

Mr Mzumbe, on page 26 of your application, on the sixth line the sentence starts with -

That's the sentence. My understanding of that sentence is you are not admitting to the fact that you were part of the group who had caught him and stabbed him and set him alight, what do you say to this? Because you are not specifically associating yourself with the group that did that.

MR MZUMBE: When we were making this statement, this statement was made in front of the police, so I was afraid to state everything that I did because I was afraid of being sent to prison for a long time. I was writing this in front of the police and I was also scared. It's not the same as what I'm saying here. What I'm saying here is the whole truth.

If you can read this paper carefully, I only stopped at the point where I said that after they shot at us I left. Because when you are making a statement in front of the police you become scared and if there's nobody else helping you, you become afraid. It's not that everything I've written here is the truth because I wrote this statement in front of the police. There was nobody who was advising me.

CHAIRPERSON: Is this your handwriting, did you write this thing out or did somebody else write it for you or what?

MR MZUMBE: This is my handwriting, I'm the one who wrote it.

CHAIRPERSON: You wrote all this here?

MR MZUMBE: Yes, this is my handwriting.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Ms Mtanga?

MS MTANGA: In your testimony today you indicated that after these IFP people had walked into the tavern, shot at you, you were then told to get out and you were kicked one by one as you went out of the door, you left the scene and then you indicated that you went back to the tavern where you found the group that had arrested or caught Mr Selai, what made you go back to the scene after you had been chased by the IFP? What made you go back?

MR MZUMBE: During those times we didn't sleep, we would be awake for the whole night guarding for anything that could happen. The reason why I went back is that I knew that they could come back again, so there was no time for me to sleep. I just thought let me go back to look or to see what had happened after I left and then when I arrived, Johannes was caught by the comrades. We didn't sleep in the townships at that time. So I couldn't stay at home not knowing what was happening where I was from, because we were always alert during the night.

MS MTANGA: Can you recall round about what time did the IFP come to attack you at the tavern? What time did this take place?

MR MZUMBE: It was after 7 o'clock, it was between 7, 8 or 9 o'clock, but I'm not sure about the exact time.

MS MTANGA: What time did you go back to the scene after you returned home?

MR MZUMBE: After we'd been dispersed by the police or after Johannes ordered us?

MS MTANGA: You were ordered by - the incident where Johannes ordered you out of the tavern, took place you are saying, between 7 and 9pm and then you went home, so my question is, round about what time did you go back to the tavern and found Johannes with the group that had caught up with him.

MR MZUMBE: I think it was after an hour or an hour and some few minutes that I went back.

MS MTANGA: Did you subsequently learn how they arrested Johannes Selai, because my understanding of your evidence is that you were all chased out of the tavern by the IFP, which means the IFP had an upper-hand over you at that particular tmme. So did you subsequently know how did they arrest, how did they catch up with Johannes Selai?

MR MZUMBE: Nobody told me because when the shooting - and after the shooting, it would just be confusion and chaos in the township and people would want to know from which direction is the shooting coming from. So I knew because I was there, so that is why I went back to the scene. Nobody told me that Johannes was with the comrades or the comrades had caught him.

The reason why I went back is because I was there before, so I wanted to know what had happened after I left because we were guarding in the township at the time, always.

MS MTANGA: Did you Johannes before this incident?

MR MZUMBE: Yes.

MS MTANGA: Did you know that he was an IFP member?

MR MZUMBE: No, I didn't know. That surprised me because there were people that would join and you wouldn't know when they joined the IFP. You would see when there is conflict that such and such a person is a member of that group.

MS MTANGA: Is it your evidence that you clearly identified him as the person who had stood at the door, kicking you as you were going out?

MR MZUMBE: Yes, I know that it was him.

MS MTANGA: No further questions, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Ms Mtanga. Has the Panel got any questions?

MR SIBANYONI: No questions, Mr Chairperson.

MR LAX: Just one question, Chair.

Mr Mzumbe, you didn't quite answer the question that Ms Mtanga put to you, which was "How was the victim in this matter, Mr Selai, how was he abducted, how was he apprehended"?

MR MZUMBE: I said that after he ordered us to go outside the tavern, I left and I went and I went home. When I came back, when I arrived, the comrades had already caught him.

MR LAX: Yes. So you don't know how he was apprehended?

MR MZUMBE: No, I don't know. When I arrived he was already caught.

MS MTANGA: This violence in Boipatong between IFP and ANC, did it precede the actual massacre itself? Had it started before the massacre?

MR MZUMBE: This incident happened after the Boipatong massacre.

MR LAX: Yes, but the violence itself, this animosity between the IFP who lived a Kwamadala and the ANC residents, was the violence already on the go before the massacre itself happened?

MR MZUMBE: Yes, it happened before the Boipatong massacre.

MR LAX: Yes. Thank you very much.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Koopedi, any re-examination?

MR KOOPEDI: Nothing in re-exam, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Mzumbe, thank you, you are excused.

MR KOOPEDI: Chairperson, that's evidence. May I call the next witness, Mr Msimango?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------CHAIRPERSON: Mr Msimango, will you take the witness stand. Just remain standing and give us your full names for the record.

MOKETE BERNARD MSIMANGO: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, you may be seated. Mr Koopedi?

EXAMINATION BY MR KOOPEDI: Thank you, Chairperson.

Mr Msimango, is it correct that you are an applicant in this matter and that your application is the one that appears on page 10 of the bundle of documents?

MR MSIMANGO: That's correct.

MR KOOPEDI: Is it also correct that the incident you are appearing before this Honourable Committee for, occurred on the 29th of July 1992, and this involves the attack on one, John Selai?

MR MSIMANGO: That's correct.

MR KOOPEDI: Could you briefly tell this Honourable Committee where you were and what happened in the evening of that day.

MR MSIMANGO: I was at Checkers Tavern, drinking. While we were drinking we heard gunshots outside and then we tried to hide ourselves. There was no place for me to hide myself because there were many people in the tavern, so I stood next to the door and then Johannes appeared.

As he appeared he dragged me towards himself and then he said "Go out, they won't do anything" and then they pushed me on the wall. Johannes stood at the door, he was telling these people inside to go outside one by one, they won't do anything to them.

So they went outside one by one and then a gang appeared from nowhere and then Johannes and his friends ran away and then people came out of the tavern and all of us went out ways.

I went home. While I was still at home, after some time - Checkers Tavern is not far away from my home, then I saw a large group of people entering Checkers Tavern. That is when I left my home, taking my panga and I went to Checkers. Then when I arrived there I saw Johannes, he was being assaulted and being asked questions about his other friends.

When I arrived I said to them "Don't ask him many questions", and then I hacked him with the panga. When I hacked him they took him outside and he was doused with petrol and set alight. While he was still burning, the police and soldiers appeared and they came to his rescue and then we ran away and he was left there with the police. They took him to the hospital.

MR KOOPEDI: Now for your part on Johannes, did you receive any personal gain?

MR MSIMANGO: I hacked Johannes ...(intervention)

MR KOOPEDI: My question to you is, for having taken part in assaulting or injuring Johannes, did you receive any personal gain, did you receive any money for it?

MR MSIMANGO: No, I did not receive anything. I did not expect to be remunerated in any way because we were at war with Johannes and his party.

MR KOOPEDI: Do you then regard this attack as having been politically motivated?

MR MSIMANGO: Yes, because he was a member of Inkatha and I live in the township and I was a supporter of ANC. So when they come from Kwamadala into the township, their aim is to fight, so we as the residents in the township, we fight together against those people from Kwamadala. So Johannes was one of those people who were resident at Kwamadala Hostel.

MR KOOPEDI: Finally, do you think you have fully disclosed to this Honourable Committee, all the relevant and material facts about this issue?

MR MSIMANGO: Yes, I think so.

MR KOOPEDI: Thank you, Chairperson, no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Ms Mtanga, any questions?

MS MTANGA: I have no questions, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: The Panel?

MR SIBANYONI: No questions, Mr Chairperson.

MR LAX: No questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Have you got anything further?

MR KOOPEDI: Nothing, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Msimango, you are excused, thank you.

MR KOOPEDI: Chairperson, may I call the next witness, Mr Ernest Hlongwane?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------CHAIRPERSON: Mr Hlongwane, are your full names Ernest Mzai Fanie Hlongwane?

ERNEST MZAI FANIE HLONGWANE: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you, you may be seated. Yes Mr Koopedi?

EXAMINATION BY MR KOOPEDI: Thank you, Chairperson.

Mr Hlongwane, is it correct that you are a co-applicant in this matter and that your application appears on page 17 of the bundle of documents before this Honourable Committee?

MR HLONGWANE: That's correct.

MR KOOPEDI: Is it also correct that your application involves the attack on one, John Selai, and which occurred on the 29th of July 1992?

MR HLONGWANE: That's correct.

MR KOOPEDI: Could you briefly tell this Honourable Committee what happened on the evening of that day.

MR HLONGWANE: As far as I can recall it could have been two to three weeks after the Boipatong massacre. Those were very difficult times, we were always on guard, guarding our township. On that very same day, that night I was at the Checkers Tavern, we were sitting there. Many people were there and there were also other comrades from the township.

While we were still sitting there, one of my friends arrived, that is Mvula Khumalo. When he arrived he asked me to accompany him to another shebeen at Mabaseka, the same street. He wanted to meet his girlfriend. We went there indeed.

When we arrived there his girlfriend wasn't there. We didn't waste any time. On our way back - because my intention was to go back to Checkers Tavern because there were people that I left there, it could have been 200 metres away from Checkers Tavern, that's when I heard the gunshots.

As we were looking around, we realised that these gunshots were coming from Checkers Tavern because there were many people standing outside the tavern and there was also a car there. Then we ran away. As we were running away - we ran to my home. From Checkers Tavern to my home is a very short distance. When I arrived at home we stood at the gate together with Mvula for about five minutes and then Mvula then decided that he'll go to those people.

At that time it was known that if we heard a rumour that the Inkatha was present in the township or we heard gunshots in the township, ever person who was not armed at that time would go to his home to arm himself. So when Mvula left, I went inside the house and took my panga and thereafter I heard a noise from Checkers Tavern, then I decided to go back to Checkers Tavern to see what was happening there. Because in my mind I already knew that those were members of the IFP from Kwamadala Hostel.

When I was in Baroleng Street, then I saw a large group of people. Fortunately when I arrived there I saw comrades from the township amongst them. Johannes was already taken outside, he was being asked questions and being assaulted.

I asked him questions when I arrived, why they did what they did. He could not explain. What I heard from him was that he was in the company of other members of IFP and they've ran away with a car. That's how they survived. I did not ask more questions. I hacked him several times with my panga and the other group that I found there, they were doing the same, they were hacking him and dousing him with petrol.

Then from that group a suggestion was made that he should be set alight. I also suggested that he should be burnt because he was a sell-out and at that time we knew that those people who were called ...(indistinct), they were members of the IFP. Unfortunately at that time the police arrived in a Casspir, together with the soldiers. That is how Johannes escaped, that is why he's still alive, even today.

When the police and soldiers arrived tlere they dispersed our group and then we ran away to different places.

MR KOOPEDI: Did you anything personally for having participated in this action?

MR HLONGWANE: No, there is nothing that I got out of that.

MR KOOPEDI: Do you regard this attack as having being politically motivated?

MR HLONGWANE: Yes, because there was war at that time between the IFP and the ANC and the IFP people, like I've already testified, were people who were residents of Kwamadala Hostel and the ANC people were obviously residents of Boipatong.

MR KOOPEDI: Do you believe that you have fully disclosed all the relevant facts to this Honourable Committee?

MR HLONGWANE: That's correct.

MR KOOPEDI: Chairperson, that is the evidence from this witness.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you, Mr Koopedi. Ms Mtanga, have you got any questions?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS MTANGA: Yes, Chairperson.

Mr Hlongwane, I have a similar problem with your application as that of Mr Mzumbe. You don't seem to have been part of the group that was attacked by Mr Selai, and in your evidence I understand that you were not at the tavern at the time they came to attack. But you further go on and say that it was alleged that he was apprehended by the group that he had attacked and that he was assaulted by them and set alight ultimately. Why is it that you never in your application, associated yourself with this incident, as it appears on page 19 of your application?

MR HLONGWANE: Like Comrade Mzumbe has already said, the conditions under which we filled these forms. The other thing that I realised is that the writing that appears here is mine. We filled these forms at the police station.

I would ask this Committee to understand that we were under difficult conditions, it was not easy at that time to trust anybody and there was no other person who could help us concerning the filling of these forms. Because what I'm saying now before this Committee is the truth, but what is written here - like I said, we filled these forms at the police station and we were afraid that if we tell the truth that will result in us serving long sentences in prison. Or even those people who were present there could easily report that to the IFP and tell them that I was involved in the attack at Checkers Tavern.

It was just a question of being afraid, but now I'm telling everything as it happened, there is nothing that I'm hiding here.

MS MTANGA: Your application is also slightly different from the two other applicants who have testified today, in that on page 18, paragraph 9A(4), you indicated that one of the reasons for attacking Johannes Selai is that he had rendered assistance to the IFP during the Boipatong massacre. Is this something you had heard or something you had direct knowledge of, that Johannes Selai had participated in the Boipatong massacre?

MR HLONGWANE: This thing regarding Mr Selai, I had already heard that, that he was a member of the IFP, he was a resident at Kwamadala Hostel. The day when I arrived at Checkers Tavern was when I realised that he was a member of the IFP.

MS MTANGA: Did you know Mr Selai before this incident?

MR HLONGWANE: Yes, I did.

MS MTANGA: Did you know him before the Boipatong massacre?

MR HLONGWANE: Yes, I had known him for many years because I attended school at Lebogang High School which was near his home. His home was facing that school that I was attending at that time. The other thing that made me to know him was that his younger brother who was a soldier at that time, that is Boy Selai, we used to play soccer together and we were attending the same school at Lebogang High School. So I knew his family, I knew him very well.

MS MTANGA: Did you know him as an IFP member at that time, that is before the Checkers Tavern incident?

MR HLONGWANE: Before the Checkers incident I had already heard that Johannes was already a member of the IFP, because people were changing their allegiance, today they will be comrades and on the other day they will be on the other side of the IFP. So when you see him on the other side, then you'll know that he's no longer on your side but he has now joined the IFP.

MS MTANGA: I have no further questions, Chairperson.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS MTANGA

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Ms Mtanga. Has the Panel got any questions?

MR LAX: Just one small thing, Chair.

Mr Hlongwane, looking back now at this incident from where you sit today, how do you feel about it?

MR HLONGWANE: I feel very bad. All the time when I was outside, even in prison I've been troubled by this. This thing that happened at Checkers Tavern is something that I did not expect because those people of the IFP had already attacked the Boipatong people. I am not happy that we injured him and also I am not happy about what they also did at Boipatong. I feel very sorry to Johannes Selai and his family.

MR LAX: Thanks Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Re-examination, Mr Koopedi?

MR KOOPEDI: Nothing in re-exam, thanks Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Hlongwane, thank you, you are excused.

MR KOOPEDI: Chairperson, we beg leave to call the last applicant, Mr Patose.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------CHAIRPERSON: Mr Patose, please remain standing. Are your full names Jabulani Montechristo Patose?

JABULANI MONTECHRISTO PATOSE: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: You may be seated, thank you. Mr Koopedi?

EXAMINATION BY MR KOOPEDI: Thank you, Chairperson.

Mr Patose, is it correct that you are a co-applicant in this matter and that your application form is on page 3 of the bundle of documents before this Honourable Committee?

MR PATOSE: That's correct.

MR KOOPEDI: Now is it also correct that you are applying for amnesty for an incident that occurred on the 29th of July 1992, an attack on one, John Selai, or Johannes Selai?

MR PATOSE: That's correct.

MR KOOPEDI: Could you briefly tell this Honourable Committee where you were and what happened to you this evening.

MR PATOSE: On that particular day we were at Boipatong next to my home, that's when we heard from Daddy Ditukwe that, he said to us "We are busy drinking and people have been shot at Checkers Tavern and those people that have attacked are IFP people. We immediately went to Checkers Tavern to see what was happening there.

On our way we came across people who were going to Checkers Tavern. We went there together till we arrived at the tavern. That's when I saw Mr Selai being caught there. Then I heard that he was one of the people who were present when people were shot at the tavern. I became very angry when I heard that and I hit him with my fists and I kicked him.

While we were assaulting him I went back a bit because I saw people assaulting him with weapons, so I did not want to injure myself. Then I saw my girlfriend with out child, a very small baby. Then I took my girlfriend to her place. That is not far from Checkers Tavern, a street behind Checkers Tavern. I accompanied her to her home because I wanted to come back so that we could finish the job of assaulting Johannes.

When I came back I realised that he was already burning and the police were already shooting, but I could smell the teargas and I ran away as well.

MR KOOPEDI: Now there's something I missed. What did you personally do to Mr Selai?

MR PATOSE: When I arrived there I hit him with fists and I kicked him. I kicked him and I hit him with my fists.

MR KOOPEDI: Okay. Perhaps the reason I'm asking is because there is an allegation, or there was an allegation in court that you chopped him with some object. Did you chop him?

MR PATOSE: No, I did not hack him.

MR KOOPEDI: Okay. Now do you regard this attack on Mr Selai as having been politically motivated?

MR PATOSE: Yes, it is motivated by politics because at that time in Boipatong, even before the Boipatong massacre, it was already known that the Inkatha people were attacking people. They were also attacking schools as well. They were also attacking leaders of the ANC, like Mr Sotso. It was known at that time that if you were a member of the IFP, you were supposed to be killed so that, or you would be chased out of the township, either dead or alive.

MR KOOPEDI: Did you gain anything personally from this attack?

MR PATOSE: No, I did not expect to get anything because I was just protecting myself and the people who were resident at my place.

MR KOOPEDI: Now do you think you have told everything that is to be told, that is have you fully disclosed all the material facts?

MR PATOSE: That's correct.

MR KOOPEDI: No further questions, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Koopedi. Ms Mtanga, questions?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS MTANGA: Thank you, Chairperson, one question.

Mr Patose, in your application the essence of your application is that you were implicated in this attempted murder act. You never played any role. Can you explain why did you write this in your application, in the light of your evidence today?

MR PATOSE: I made this application because I was present when Johannes was assaulted, I kicked him and I hit him with my fists. That is why I'm asking for forgiveness and I'm applying for amnesty.

MS MTANGA: No further questions, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Ms Mtanga. Has the Panel got any questions?

MR SIBANYONI: No questions, Mr Chairperson.

MR LAX: Nothing, Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Have you got any re-examination, Mr Koopedi?

MR KOOPEDI: Nothing in re-exam, Chairperson. And I should say that that is the case for all the applicants, we intend calling no other witness, thank you, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: So noted. Thank you, Mr Koopedi. Mr Patose, you're excused, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Mtanga, is there any other evidence?

MS MTANGA: Chairperson, I intend to call no other witness. The victim in this matter, Mr Johannes Selai was notified and he made contact with our Investigator yesterday that he would be coming here, but he has not arrived, so I assume that he will not be attending this hearing because he had not attended even yesterday, which the date the matter was scheduled for.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MS MTANGA: That ends my evidence as well.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, we have noted that, that there was due notification and that the victim has failed to appear.

Mr Koopedi, have you got any submissions on the merits of this application?

MR KOOPEDI: I have a brief address, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, go ahead.

MR KOOPEDI IN ARGUMENT: Chairperson, Honourable Committee Members, it is my submission that this incident occurred at a time when there was great political turmoil in Boipatong. This is at a time where the residents of Boipatong were regarded or categorised as ANC, whether you were ANC or not and that people who stayed at the hostel were regarded as IFP. And in fact, Chairperson, anyone seen in the midst of IFP persons or even suspected of having IFP links, this person would be attacked and killed, Chairperson. And it is in that situation where these applicants found themselves.

It is my submission, Chairperson, that the attack or the attempted murder on Mr Selai, could not have been anything than political. And I would briefly want to allude to the fact that in the application forms of these applicants before you, none of them seem to properly own up, that is in their application forms.

My submission, Chairperson, Honourable Committee Members, is that the applicants' explanations should be accepted. These applicants before you were not assisted by any legal person or any person in fact, when they completed their forms, other than the members of the SAP.

At that time, Chairperson, their appeal was still pending, that is when they completed these applications forms. And as you can see, Chairperson, on their application forms, these forms were attested to in the Charge Office of the Vanderbijlpark Police Station. And it is on those basis that I submit that their explanation be acceptable, that they feared in fully disclosing when they did their application forms and that that should not be viewed as an attempt to run away from the truth.

Going back to the incident that evening, Chairperson, Honourable Committee Members, you will note that from the evidence there is not one person who ordered this attack, no person who could say "I was in a position of authority, I ordered this attack", this was a spontaneous reaction of a community at war, at war with the people from Kwamadala, or people who they believed were from Kwamadala and this was a political war and nothing else, Chairperson.

And again, all these applicants before you have taken an active role in the attack on Mr John Selai and they have fully told you what their roles were. It's my submission, Chairperson, that they could have placed themselves on the scene, ...(indistinct) some common purpose, but instead of doing so they actually told you about the active and perhaps very damaging role they had this evening. And it's my submission that that should go on to support their evidence here that they have fully disclosed all the material facts.

And finally, Chairperson, it has been evidence here that none of these applicants before you received any personal or financial gain. And it is on those basis that I would ask this Honourable Committee to grant these four applicants before you amnesty. Thank you, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Are they serving the sentence in respect of this incident?

MR KOOPEDI: Yes, that is so, Chairperson, all four of them are serving sentences. I have the sentences ready with me here, perhaps I could be of help. Chairperson, the last applicant, Mr Patose, is serving a 7 year sentence, Msimango is serving a 5 year sentence - sorry, a 7 year sentence, Hlongwane is serving a 7 year sentence and Mzumbe is serving a 5 year sentence.

CHAIRPERSON: And in which court were they convicted and sentenced?

MR KOOPEDI: They were all convicted in the Regional court of Vanderbijlpark.

CHAIRPERSON: And they were convicted of attempted murder in respect of Mr Selai.

MR KOOPEDI: Precisely, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Was that the only charge and the only count they were convicted of?

MR KOOPEDI: That is so, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you, Mr Koopedi. Ms Mtanga, have you got any submissions?

MS MTANGA: Chairperson, I will not be making any submissions and I wish to leave this matter in your discretion.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you. Yes, that concludes the testimony and the formal proceedings in these applications. We will consider the applications and we will endeavour to prepare a decision as soon as circumstances permit, at which point the interested parties will be notified of the decision of the Panel. So under those circumstances we reserve the decision in the matter.

We thank you, Mr Koopedi, for your assistance in this matter.

MR KOOPEDI: Thank you, Chairperson. May we be excused?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Is this your only matter before us?

MR KOOPEDI: Unfortunately so, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, well then we will excuse you.

MR KOOPEDI: Okay, thanks, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much. We have actually adjourned the other matter by agreement, till 2 o'clock this afternoon, which I assume would be the remaining one on the roll for today.

MS MTANGA: Yes, Chairperson, we had two other matters which were enrolled for today, those are the Qhalo matter and Makola matter.

CHAIRPERSON: Now what is the position with those, are they ready to proceed or what?

MS MTANGA: Chairperson, I'm not sure how much time we have, but the matter that we can proceed with which I think can be disposed of in a shorter time, is the Qhalo matter and the representative of Mr Qhalo is here.

CHAIRPERSON: Is she here?

MS MTANGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Let me just see if we have the papers. Yes, it it's possible to dispose of it, then I would wish to do so. So perhaps we should just stand down for a short while and also allow Mr Koopedi and his clients to leave and rearrange to get the other matter on. So we'll stand down for a few minutes.

MS MTANGA: Thank you, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: We will proceed to hear the amnesty application of Wiseman Nzibanzi Qhalo, amnesty reference AM1096/96.

The Panel is constituted as will be apparent from the record. On behalf of the applicant, Ms Tanzer. Would you just put yourself on record please.

MS TANZER: Thank you, Chair. My name is Goldie Tanzer and I represent the applicant in this matter.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Ms Mtanga?

MS MTANGA: My name is Lula Mtanga, the Evidence Leader.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: I will be assisting the next-of-kin of the victim, that's Mr John Maduna - sorry, Mr Solomon Maduna.

CHAIRPERSON: Solomon Maduna?

MS MTANGA: Yes, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well. Yes, thank you, Ms Mtanga. Mr Tanzer, do you want your client to be sworn in?

MS TANZER: Thank you, I do, Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Qhalo, can you hear the interpretation on your headset? Alright, now please switch on your microphone with touching the red button there. Now I'm going to ask you to please just stand. Your full names are Wiseman Mzibanzi Qhalo, is that right?

WISEMAN MZIBANZI QHALO: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, you may be seated. Yes, Ms Tanzer.

EXAMINATION BY MS TANZER: Thank you, Chair.

Mr Qhalo, you are the applicant in this matter, is that correct?

MR QHALO: ...(no English interpretation)

MS TANZER: Mr Qhalo, can you tell this Committee when you were born, the date of your birth.

MR QHALO: In 1961, on the 10th.

MS TANZER: Mr Qhalo, you completed a bundle or a bundle was signed by you, which is pages 1 to 53, is that correct, have you seen this bundle before?

MR QHALO: Yes.

MS TANZER: Now you pointed out to me that there were several errors in the bundle regarding certain information, is that correct?

MR QHALO: That is correct.

MS TANZER: I'll beg the Committee's indulgence and just go through these errors at the outset, so we don't cause any prejudice to Mr Qhalo's application.

Firstly, the identity number at number 4 on page 2 of the bundle, is incorrectly reflected, is that correct?

MR QHALO: I've given them the ID number but I'm not sure whether it is the right one.

MS TANZER: Well for the record and the Committee I would like to record that his ID number is 610628575. There was an 8 there and it should be a 5 - 4080.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. ...(indistinct - no microphone)

MS TANZER: Now on page 3, where it asks you to furnish the further particulars, right, regarding the acts and the nature thereof, alright, at number 2 you say that the act took place in August 1994, is that correct?

MR QHALO: That is correct.

MS TANZER: No, is it not correct that the offence took place in March of 1994? The offence of which you have been convicted.

MR QHALO: It happened in March in 1994.

MS TANZER: So in fact it's incorrect. For the Committee's reference, page 3 at number 2.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, we've got that.

MS TANZER: Okay.

Now ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: In fact Mr Qhalo has corrected that himself. He rectified it himself, he wrote something here. There's a document somewhere here that I recall where he set it straight, so we've got the correct date in any case. But proceed with the others, let's see is there's anything that might prejudice him.

MS TANZER: Mr Chair, the letter that you got he did not sign and he has not had sight of that, that is why I'm putting it before the Committee at this stage.

CHAIRPERSON: Alright. Well let's see if there's anything of substance that really prejudices him.

MS TANZER: Okay.

On page 5 of the bundle reference - when you are asked about your justification regarding such offences associated with a political motive, a summary is basically presented to the Committee of the offences with a political motive. Was this summary the summary that you gave to the person who took this information down, or is this information that the person wrote himself?

MR QHALO: I told him my statement and then he wrote down, so I don't know what he wrote because I cannot write.

MS TANZER: Did he read the statement back to you?

MR QHALO: Yes, he did.

CHAIRPERSON: But you'll tell us in your evidence now what had really happened? This is not your handwriting in this document here, but you will now when you testify, when you tell us what happened you will tell us the truth, is that right?

MR QHALO: That is correct, I'll tell the truth.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well. Yes, Ms Tanzer.

MS TANZER: Right. There's mention made of a Commander Smelo Magutswane. Was there a Commander Smelo Magutswane at the squatter camp in 1994?

MS TANZER: He was not the Commander, he was one of the members of the SDUs, he was not the Commander.

MS TANZER: Now you also make mention of the DF Malan Accord and the Groote Schuur Minutes, do you know anything about these Minutes or this Accord?

MR QHALO: No, I don't know anything about those minutes.

MS TANZER: Just for the Committee's convenience, on page 6 once again there's reference to Smelo Magutswane which he states is incorrect information.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MS TANZER: On page 7, is this your signature?

MR QHALO: Yes, it's my signature.

MS TANZER: That is page 7, Commissioner.

On page 10 there is a letter that is sent to the Committee. Is this letter written by yourself?

MR QHALO: No.

MS TANZER: Is it your signature?

MR QHALO: No, it's not my signature.

MS TANZER: So you can't verify the information that's set out therein?

MR QHALO: Because this is not my signature, so I cannot confirm what is written here.

MS TANZER: Thank you, Chair.

During 1994, were you a member of a political organisation?

MR QHALO: Yes.

MS TANZER: Can you tell this Committee which organisation?

MR QHALO: The ANC, I was a member of the SDU.

MS TANZER: Where were you staying during 1994?

MR QHALO: At Nswaledi squatter camp.

MS TANZER: Were you employed while you were staying at this squatter camp?

MR QHALO: Yes, I was employed.

MS TANZER: What were you doing?

MR QHALO: I was doing carpentry.

MS TANZER: And where were you working?

MR QHALO: Randburg.

MS TANZER: What motivated you to join the ANC?

MR QHALO: The reason why I joined ANC is because we were killed by the members of the IFP and we were also fighting for our country so that we cannot be oppressed. That is why I joined the ANC.

MS TANZER: Did you hold any position with the ANC?

MR QHALO: No.

MS TANZER: And at the Baroleng squatter camp, did you hold any position?

MR QHALO: I was a member of the Self Defence Unit.

MS TANZER: What did your duties include as being a member of the Self Defence Unit?

MR QHALO: It was to protect the community from being killed by the members of the IFP. We were protecting the community.

MS TANZER: Do you remember who was the Commander or leader of the Self Defence Unit at that time during 1994?

MR QHALO: Yes, I do know him, I do know the leader. There was a leader at the squatter camp.

MS TANZER: Do you remember his name?

MR QHALO: I know his name, it was Xholile Hlomendlini. He was the Chairperson.

MS TANZER: Is it correct that this man is also known as Chairperson, Chairman?

MR QHALO: Yes, he was the Chairman of the squatter camp.

MS TANZER: Now can you tell this Committee what happened on the 28th of March 1994? Can you tell them briefly the events that led up to your conviction that night.

MR QHALO: On the 28th there was going to be a march, the IFP march and we heard that there was a shooting, the IFP people were shooting. We were patrolling as Self Defence Unit members. At about six, others with spears were around that area, that garage. We then appeared and they ran away.

At about six, our Chairman came and he said that members of the IFP are in a kombi in a certain corner and they have spears with them. I then asked where they were and he said that they went into a shack. So he took us to the shack where the members of the IFP were. We had torches with us.

When we arrived there we knocked at the door and when they realised that we were around a candle, it was dark, the candle was not lit. We knocked again and then nobody answered. I then kicked the door. I went in and I had a torch in my hand and I had a firearm in my hand. I found them hiding in that place.

I woke them up by kicking them. I then asked them who they were, where they are coming from and whose shack is this. Because when I was looking around the shack, it was like a new shack, there was nothing inside, no furniture. They then told us that they were from an IFP march, they were hijacked by the people of the IFP. I then asked them why the IFP members didn't kill them if they were members of the ANC. One of them then said that they were from the IFP march and they were hijacked by the IFP march. I then told them that we must attack them because we don't have members of the IFP in that area.

Chairman left and then he said that they must not be attacked in that shack. I then asked where were we supposed to attack them because we found tlem in that shack. He then told us that he was going to look for a car and would take them to Orlando where they would be attacked. Chairman left and he said that we would find him next to the garage, he was going to fetch a car.

He then came back with a car. I volunteered that I would be one of the people who were going to shoot at these people. Then Chairman agreed, he said that he was also going to be part of that group who was going to attack them. There were four of us in that car, two in front and four at the back.

The drive drove the car and next to the school in Orlando we told them to get out of the car, we also got out of the car. There were two of these people and the driver and the passenger didn't get out of the car. When we arrived at a place where there is grass and it was dark at the time, I shot at one of them. He fell down and then I shot at him again. And when I looked around the other one was running away. I tried to shoot at him but he was far away. He then ran away, he managed to run away.

We then came back with Xholile Hlomendlini and we gave the Self Defence Unit members a report that one of them managed to escape, we didn't kill him. So we patrolled the whole night until the morning. I was then arrested on the 29th, on Tuesday. Because all this happened on Monday, so I was arrested on Tuesday, as I'm serving my sentence now. I was arrested in Shawelo. I was pointed by one person, but I'm not sure who that person is between the two, but there was another one who was in court and he was the one who pointed me. That is how I was arrested. That is all for now.

MS TANZER: Can you tell this Committee where you got the firearm from?

MR QHALO: The community would pop out money so that we can buy firearms, so this weapon belonged to the community.

MS TANZER: Where were the weapons kept?

MR QHALO: I kept some of the weapons, but I then got arrested and when I was released on bail, the weapons were not with me, they were with the Chairman. So when I was arrested the weapons were taken from my place and they were taken to the Chairman.

MS TANZER: Can you tell this Committee where you kept the weapons? Were they hidden or were they just kept in your shack, where were they?

MR QHALO: They were hidden in the shack, in my shack.

MS TANZER: Now on that day in question, the day of the attack, were you alert, was the squatter camp alert to any kind of attack from the IFP on that day?

MR QHALO: Yes, the Chairman used to call us to a meeting and he would tell us that as Self Defence Unit members we must protect the community when the IFP members came to attack. We must defend ourselves and protect the community from them.

MS TANZER: Did you know the persons, the deceased, and the persons you attacked that night? Had you known them before or had you seen them before the night of the attack?

MR QHALO: It was the first time I saw them in that shack.

MS TANZER: Was there any personal reason for your attacking these people?

MR QHALO: The reason why I attacked them is because they were members of the IFP and I was a member of the ANC. That was the only reason.

MS TANZER: What was the relationship like between the IFP and the ANC during 1994, can you briefly just tell the Committee that?

MR QHALO: In 1994, members of the IFP were killing members of the ANC and we were also killing members of the IFP, as it happened that day. So the situation was bad.

MS TANZER: So in fact, do you regard the attack on Hadebe and Maduna as politically motivated or was there anything personal about it?

MR QHALO: Yes, it was politically motivated because they were members of the IFP and I was a member of the ANC.

MS TANZER: Was there any personal gain or reward that you obtained from attacking these two people?

MR QHALO: No, I didn't gain anything.

MS TANZER: Is it correct that you are a married man?

MR QHALO: Yes, I'm married.

MS TANZER: Do you have a family?

MR QHALO: Yes, I have a family.

MS TANZER: Were they staying with you at the Baroleng squatter camp at the time, in 1994?

MR QHALO: Yes, they were staying with, my family was staying with me then. But I had to shacks, one was in Shawelo and I had a small baby, but I was staying with them at the time of my arrest.

MS TANZER: Can you identify any other people that took part, firstly in the attack on the shack in which the two men were found and secondly, on the attack itself when you went into the car?

MR QHALO: I was not alone, I was with people. We were there as Self Defence Units, but they didn't do anything, they didn't take part, but they were with me and I'm the one who kicked the door and when Chairman came with the car we left them behind. I then left with Chairman to go and kill these people. When we came back we gave them the report that one of them escaped. So they didn't take part, but they were there with me.

MS TANZER: Can you name the people who were in the car? Who was in the front seat, who was in the seat next to the driver? Is there anybody you can name for this Committee?

MR QHALO: Because we were known by clan names, I don't know the name of the driver, but the other person was Allie and in the back seat, it was myself and the two members of the IFP and Xholile Hlomendlini. The driver I don't know his name, but he was also residing at the squatter camp.

MS TANZER: When you questioned the two men in the shack, what language were they speaking in?

MR QHALO: They were speaking isiZulu.

MS TANZER: Have you disclosed all the relevant and material information to this Committee about your actions on this night in question?

MR QHALO: Yes, I have disclosed all the information, all the details about that night, there's nothing else I left behind.

MS TANZER: How do you feel now about your actions upon these two people, what are your feelings today about what you did that night?

MR QHALO: That is why I applied for amnesty, because what I did was influenced by the politics and even in jail we would discuss about these issues, that what we did was wrong, but they were influenced by politics. That is why I made this application to you so that I can be forgiven.

MS TANZER: Thank you, Chair, that is the evidence of the applicant.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Ma'am. Ms Mtanga, have you got questions?

MS MTANGA: Yes, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Go ahead please.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS MTANGA: Thank you.

Mr Qhalo, the person you referred to as Xholile Hlomendlini, is it the same person as who was prosecuted with you in this matter, who was then called Wellington Hlomendlini?

MR QHALO: Yes, that is the person.

MS MTANGA: My understanding of your evidence, you are saying that you acted upon information brought to you by Xholile Hlomendlini, who was then the Chairperson of the SDUs. Am I right?

MR QHALO: Yes, as I've already said, he was the Chairman of that particular place, he was the one who gave us information, that is correct.

MS MTANGA: Do you recall the evidence given by Mr Hlomendlini in court about how this incident took place?

MR QHALO: I denied this in court, that is why I made an application to the Truth Commission because I denied my actions in court, so I don't know what he said in court.

MS MTANGA: Mr Hlomendlini testified that he had been compelled or forced or coerced by you to participate in this incident because he owed you money. He had not given instructions, he acted upon your coercion that he must carry out this offence and assist you because he owed you money and he could not do otherwise but comply with what you had asked him to do. What do you say to this?

MR QHALO: That is not true, he did not owe me any money, he was the Chairperson at the squatter camp.

MS MTANGA: But according to the judgment, you had admitted that he did owe you money.

MR QHALO: I didn't admit to that because in court I denied everything. He didn't owe me any money.

MR LAX: Just give us the reference for the record.

MS MTANGA: It's page 38, Chairperson.

MR LAX: Page what, sorry.

MS MTANGA: 38 of the bundle.

MR LAX: Line?

MS MTANGA: From line 20 down.

MR LAX: Thank you.

MS MTANGA: Are you aware that Mr Hlomendlini did give this evidence that he owed you money?

MR QHALO: No, I'm not aware, it's the first time I hear about it.

MS MTANGA: The victims, Mr Hadebe and Mr Maduna, did they live with you at Nswaledi squatter camp?

MR QHALO: It was the first time I see them, that particular day. It was the first time I saw them.

MS MTANGA: Can you help us understand the situation at Nswaledi squatter camp, was the area divided into IFP and ANC, or did you all live together in one area? Were there areas that you allocated to the IFP or that were IFP only and then those that were ANC only residents?

MR QHALO: As a squatter camp there were no members of the IFP, we first saw them when they came from the rally. Everybody was belonging to the ANC at the time because you'd be given a place to stay you would be requested to show your membership card of the ANC and then you would be given a place to stay. So there were no IFP members staying in that place.

MS MTANGA: Mr Qhalo, according to the families of both Mr Hadebe and Mr Maduna, both victims lived at Nswaledi and they lived in a shack that you found them in and they ran a business of selling vegetables. What do you say to this?

MR QHALO: I would say that that is a lie because it was the first time I see them there, because I used to know all the people who were staying there. If a person came he would be taken to the meeting and then he would be shown to the people, we will be told that he was looking for a place to stay and he had a membership card of the ANC.

MS MTANGA: Did you know the - when you went to fetch them from that shack, do you know whose shack it was?

MR QHALO: I did not know whose shack it was and I also asked the Chairman because he was the one with a book whereby all the shacks were written down, so he didn't even know whose shack was that.

MS MTANGA: But Mr Qhalo, you just testified now that you knew all the residents of Nswaledi and you didn't know these two people, and yet you still can't tell me whether you knew who the owner of that shack was. Because the two people who are victims today lived in that shack at Nswaledi, and you just said you knew all the residents of Nswaledi.

MR QHALO: The reason why I'm saying this is because a meeting would be called and a person who is looking for a place to stay would come to that meeting and we would be told which number or where this person is going to stay. That is why when we arrived there I asked these people who they were, I asked the Chairman whether he knows who these people were, he didn't know and I asked whose shack was it and there was no answer for that.

MS MTANGA: My concern about your evidence, Mr Qhalo, is that at that time there was great animosity between the IFP and the ANC, especially during the time when the SDUs had to be formed, and if Mr Hadebe and Mr Maduna were indeed IFP people living in the area you would have known that a long time ago. You wouldn't have known it because of the march that had taken place in ...(indistinct). Why didn't you know these two people?

MR QHALO: That is why I'm saying I saw these people that day when I was told that they were coming from the IFP rally, that is when I knew that they were members of the IFP, and before that there were no members of the IFP in that area.

MS MTANGA: Did you see Mr Hadebe and Mr Maduna coming from the rally, did you see them specifically coming from the rally?

MR QHALO: I heard from the Chairman, he said that they got out of the kombi and they went into a certain shack. He then showed us that shack. I didn't see them.

MS MTANGA: I put it to you that according to the families of the two victims, both of them were not IFP members and in fact they were not politically affiliated. What do you say to this?

MR QHALO: If they were not members of the IFP or if they did not take part in politics, we wouldn't have killed them. Because when we asked them questions they admitted that they were members of the IFP. That is why I said that they were to be attacked.

MS MTANGA: I have no further questions, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Ms Mtanga. Has the Panel got any questions?

MR SIBANYONI: Yes, Mr Chairperson.

Mr Qhalo, was a person who is not affiliated to any political organisation, not allowed to stay at the squatter camp?

MR QHALO: We would ask where that person was coming from and we would request him to tell us in which organisation did he belong, because at that time we knew that people were from different organisations, so we didn't want to accept a person who we did not know where he belongs.

MR SIBANYONI: Now if he didn't belong to any organisation, was he not allowed to stay at the squatter camp?

MR QHALO: We would tell this person that "We are members of the ANC, if you say that you are not a member, which organisation are you going to join"? Because we wanted people who were members of the ANC. A person without a membership card of the ANC was not accepted in that area, he would be requested to go to a certain branch, get a card and then he would be given a place to stay.

MR SIBANYONI: Thank you, Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Any re-examination?

MS TANZER: No re-examination, Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Qhalo, you're excused, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Ms Tanzer.

MS TANZER: Mr Chair and the Honourable Committee, the offences ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Have you got any other evidence that you intend to lead?

MS TANZER: Oh, I thought you asked for my submissions.

CHAIRPERSON: No.

MS TANZER: No, no other evidence.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that the case for the applicant?

MS TANZER: That is the case for the applicant, Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well. Ms Mtanga, have you got any evidence that you intend to lead?

MS MTANGA: Chairperson, may I be allowed just a few minutes consultation with Mr Maduna?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Is it necessary for us to rise?

MS MTANGA: No, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well. Yes, Ms Mtanga.

MS MTANGA: Chairperson, I will not be calling any witnesses.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Yes, Ms Tanzer, now we want to hear you.

MS TANZER IN ARGUMENT: Thank you, Chair.

The offences that the applicant committed, took place during a very acrimonious period between the IFP and the ANC. Mr Chair, as you aware anyone that was suspected of being an IFP member or linked to the IFP were attacked an killed. This was - as you heard in the evidence, was a result of the relationship between the IFP and the ANC and the need for ANC comrades, the SDUs, to protect their own people because they were continuously being attacked by members of the IFP.

The attack that took place that night, as you heard from the applicant, had no personal motive whatsoever. He did not know these people, they were just suspected of being IFP members. He hadn't seen them before, they weren't people that he had a grievance with or that he had had any problem with in the past. He had learnt about their existence at the squatter camp, by the Chairperson, as he said the Chairman. As an SDU member upon the instructions of the Chairman and other SDU members in protecting their community against outsiders, especially IFP outsiders, you heard from the applicant that he did ask them when he knocked on the door and he kicked the door open, whether they were IFP members and they admitted that they were part of the IFP.

He admitted that he had lied in court at the hearing of the court case and therefore the entire court case and the judgment cannot really relate to him inasmuch as he makes a pure denial, he simply says he wasn't part of the attack and he was in bed sick at the time. In fact what he has now told the Committee, tallies to a large degree with the evidence or with the judgment of Judge Zulman(?) at the court case in the Supreme court.

You heard that there was no personal reward or gain, that he did not obtain anything out of the killing or the attack, that the attack was purely politically motivated. He made or attempted to make full disclosure of all the material facts relating to his actions.

Mr Chair, the applicant himself is a married man, he's got children, he had never had previous convictions in the past, he's not a man that had a propensity to violence or to any kind of criminal activities, he held down a job, he was a person that was living a decent life and was protecting his community. This attack that took place that night was a political attack and can only be seen as a political attack. He's not a young man, he's a man today of 39 years old. The attack took place five years ago, Mr Chair, so that would have left him in his middle 30s. And as he said, he was a man that was responsible for the keeping of the weapons even. So he had a position in the SDU, whether it was official or unofficial, he was responsible for keeping the weapons and therefore he had a certain level of responsibility as an SDU member protecting the Baroleng squatter camp against outside influence.

I therefore submit that he's made full disclosure, his application should be considered and amnesty should be granted. Thank you, Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Did this attack occur in Nswaledi squatter camp?

MS TANZER: This attack took place at the school outside the squatter camp. They were taken to a school, the Orlando School. As you heard from him it was just outside the squatter camp. It is in the judgment itself as well.

CHAIRPERSON: They apprehended these people in Nswaledi squatter camp.

MS TANZER: Yes, in a shack in the squatter camp, then they escorted them to a garage where they met the car with the Chairman who had arranged for the car and they drove them to the school where the offence took place.

CHAIRPERSON: Where did he stay at that time?

MS TANZER: At that time, as you heard from his evidence, he was staying at the Nswaledi squatter camp. He said he did have two shacks.

CHAIRPERSON: Was that where his family was?

MS TANZER: Yes, his wife was there. He actually - in his application his children come from - he himself comes from the Transkei and his children were staying with his mother in the Transkei. The children are actually present here today.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MS TANZER: Two of them.

CHAIRPERSON: So the children were with their grandmother?

MS TANZER: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: In the Transkei?

MS TANZER: Yes. And his wife was living with him at the Nswaledi squatter camp at the time.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Thank you, Ms Tanzer. Ms Mtanga, have you got any submissions?

MS MTANGA: Chairperson, my instructions from the family of Mr John Maduna are - the person who attended on behalf of the family is Mr Solomon Maduna, the father of John ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct - no microphone)

MS MTANGA: Yes. Mr Maduna, that is the father, is a very old person, he has difficulty in comprehending the process itself.

CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct - no microphone)

MS TANZER: Mr Solomon, yes. He is not opposing the application according to my understanding, but he would like the Committee or the Commission to address the situation that he is in. He is very old and the victim, that is John Maduna, had three kids whom he is now bringing up and he has no finance, so he would like the Committee to assist him financially to bring up those kids and he's concerned that he is a very old person, he may not have a person to leave them with if he dies.

CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct - no microphone)

MS MTANGA: Whose wife?

CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct - no microphone)

MS MTANGA: He has not indicated so, Chairperson, so I'm ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct - no microphone)

MS MTANGA: For the three children, that is what he has told me.

CHAIRPERSON: ... children.

MS MTANGA: Chairperson?

CHAIRPERSON: Three children.

MS MTANGA: Three children.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Solomon Maduna is responsible for the care of the children?

MS MTANGA: Yes, that is the grandchildren.

CHAIRPERSON: That is John's children?

MS MTANGA: Yes. And then for the second victim ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: I'm sorry, Mr Mtanga, have we got the details of the children?

MS MTANGA: Chairperson, I will take the - I'm concerned that he may not even recall the dates and everything.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MS MTANGA: So we may need to make a follow-up after the hearing.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, but you might be able to get some names at this stage at least.

MS MTANGA: Yes, I will try, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well.

MR LAX: ...(indistinct - no microphone)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LAX: What happened to the mothers of these children?

MS MTANGA: Chairperson, from what he has told me they just live with him. I didn't ascertain what happened to the mother of the children.

MR LAX: Maybe the Reparations Committee can follow that matter up in due course.

MS MTANGA: And then the second victim who was Antony Hadebe, who survived the attack, according to our investigation and a statement from his father, he passed away early this year. That is why he has not attended the hearing, but we are in possession of this statement from his father.

CHAIRPERSON: That's from a cause that is unrelated to this attack?

MS MTANGA: Unrelated to the attack, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Have we got details of his next-of-kin?

MS MTANGA: Of Mr Antony Hadebe? It's Mr Thomas Fana Hadebe.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that the father?

MS MTANGA: That's the father. He is 69 years old and lives at 7A, Zone 1.

CHAIRPERSON: Where is that?

MS MTANGA: Pimville. There is a number given on the statement but I can't - I think it's 127A, but I can't clearly read it.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MS MTANGA: Pimville, Soweto, that is where he lives.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. We have noted that. Is there anything else that you wanted to put on record or place before us?

MS MTANGA: Chair, I'm not sure if I can be allowed to place on record the information about the victim in the previous incident.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh, alright, let us just finish off this one, then we'll recall that matter and you can put that on the record.

MS MTANGA: There's nothing else I wish to place on record on both of these victims.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you, Ms Mtanga. Is there anything else that you wanted to add, Ms Tanzer?

MS TANZER: There is nothing I want to add, thank you, Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Your client is serving that sentence at this stage?

MS TANZER: He is serving a sentence at the Leeukop Prison, yes. 18 years, Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well. Yes, well thank you.

That concludes the evidence in this matter. We will have to consider the testimony and the other material that was placed before us and come to a decision on the application, which we will attempt to do as soon as circumstances permit. We will under those circumstances then reserve the decision and we will notify the parties as soon as that is available. So we reserve the decision in the matter. We thank you, Ms Tanzer for your assistance and we will excuse you.

MS TANZER: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Mtanga, you say that you wanted to recall the previous matter, that is Patose and others, if I remember correctly.

MS MTANGA: Yes, Chairperson, the application of Patose, Msimango, Mzumbe and Hlongwane.

MS MTANGA: I had indicated on the record that Mr Johannes Selai, who is the victim in the incident, had not attended the hearing, but he did arrive during lunchtime, indicating that he went to a wrong venue. He went to Boksburg because his notice indicated that the hearing would take place at Boksburg. So there was a mis-communication there.

I however consulted with him about his attitude and position in regard to the amnesty of the four applicants and he indicated to me that he reconciled with them even at the time of the trial. So he was not coming here to oppose, he was just attending formally.

CHAIRPERSON: He's not coming to formally oppose the application, but simply just to be present.

MS MTANGA: Yes, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Ms Mtanga, we have noted that. I assume he's left, Mr Selai.

MS MTANGA: Yes, he has left, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. I assume you have conveyed whatever apologies are necessary for the misunderstanding.

MS MTANGA: I did so, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: And I assume you've given him an indication as to what has happened with the application.

MS MTANGA: Yes, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well. Was he happy with that situation?

MS MTANGA: Yes, Chairperson, he was happy because he was concerned about the fact that at the trial a different version was given, so I explained to him what exactly the applicants said here and then he was happy with that.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Yes, thank you for your trouble, Ms Mtanga. We have noted that and that will form part of the record in the Patosi matter.

MS MTANGA: Yes, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

Yes, the matter that stood down from yesterday afternoon, Mohale, have the parties arrived in that matter? Mr Tleane and - yes, Mr Tleane is here. And the applicant and his legal representative? Ms Vilakazi is till here, yes.

MS MTANGA: Yes, Chairperson. Yes, they are, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh yes. Mr Knopp I see is also appearing. Are we able to proceed with that matter?

MS MTANGA: Yes, we should be able to, Chairperson. I'm not sure if we're going to adjourn for five minutes perhaps.

CHAIRPERSON: Ja, I'm always reluctant to adjourn, to stand down because you know five minutes has a terrible tendency to become 50 minutes, but it looks as if everybody is virtually ready.

Do you wish us to just stand down for you to arrange for people to take their seats?

MS MTANGA: I think, Chairperson, everyone is in here, so we can just go ahead.

CHAIRPERSON: Can we go ahead?

MS MTANGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well, can we then call the parties in the Mohale matter, Mr Tleane and Ms Vilakazi. Mr Knopp, is your client here? Can the Correctional Services bring Mr Mohale out. Alright, I think Mr Knopp just wants to attend to something. He says it's five minutes. I'll keep him to his word. We'll adjourn for five minutes.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------CHAIRPERSON: We will now proceed with the matter of Mohale, that stood down from yesterday afternoon. Mr Tleane was still busy giving evidence.

Mr Tleane, we remind you that you are still under oath, do you understand?

ALBERT TLEANE: (s.u.o.)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Knopp, have you got any questions?

MS MTANGA: Chairperson, before Advocate Knopp goes on with his cross-examination, can I be allowed to put a few questions to Mr Tleane?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, of course, Ms Mtanga. Please go ahead.

FURTHER EXAMINATION BY MS MTANGA: Thank you, Chairperson.

Mr Tleane, according to the judgment in Mohale, you had been amongst people who assisted Mr Mohale in finding funding for him for his legal assistance. Why were you involved in getting the funding for Mr Mohale, or were you involved in doing so?

MR TLEANE: I was not involved in my personal capacity, Ma'am, I was involved simply by being in the leadership of the then SANCO. Mr Mohale had previously approached SANCO, Thembisa branch, as a member of SANCO by virtue of being a resident, for assistance so that he could be able to make a bail application so that he could be able to acquire an attorney.

As such the organisation felt that there was no reason to discriminate against him. He communicated with the office in Thembisa. I was already waiting in Johannesburg there. That is how I happened to be part of that arrangement, by nature of being in the leadership of the same organisation that he had approached.

MS MTANGA: Can you give us the names of the people who were also involved in getting this funding, besides yourself.

MR TLEANE: Mr George Biela was involved in that arrangement. In fact he was part of the delegation that went to speak to Mr Mohale in prison vice versa. Mr Paul Maseko, who was then the President of the Thembisa Residents Association, was also a part as well as the Branch Secretary, Mr Mandla Gumede. He was also involved there. Those are the names of the people that I can remember of the people that were involved.

MS MTANGA: Did you at any stage visit Mr Mohale in prison?

MR TLEANE: Only once, with the delegation that went to verify the request that he had made. I was in the company of the same gentlemen that I have mentioned just now.

MS MTANGA: I am not sure if I put this question to you yesterday, do you know Mr Ephrahim Mogale?

MR TLEANE: Yes, I knew Mr Ephrahim Mogale as being an activist. In the '80s we shared a cell once during the State of Emergency at Modder B Prison. He was also in the leadership I think, of the first Executive Committee of the Congress of South African Trade Unions, along with Mr - oh, I forget him, the young lion from the North. He's in Parliament now, I just forgot his name -Peter Mokaba. That is how I happen to know Mr Mogale.

MS MTANGA: Did you at any time in 1996, during the investigation of these two incidents, have contact with Mr Mogale?

MR TLEANE: Not at all, except for the visit where the delegation went to verify the request that he had made to the organisation.

MS MTANGA: We were given evidence ...(intervention)

MR LAX: Sorry. I'm not sure that you understood the last question properly. Were you referring this Mr Mogale, or were you referring to Ephrahim Mogale?

MS MTANGA: Ephrahim.

MR TLEANE: Oh, Ephrahim.

MR LAX: Yes.

MR TLEANE: No, no, I never spoke to Mr Mogale about this matter.

MS MTANGA: And at the time these attacks took place, that is in 1992, were you ever in contact with Mr Ephrahim Mogale?

MR TLEANE: Not at all, Ma'am, not at all. I did not even know in which structures he was participating in at that stage.

MS MTANGA: You have heard the evidence of the applicant that after the murder of Songo, he was taken by you and - he was taken to Mr Mogale's care and this was carried out on your instructions, or by you communicating with Mr Mogale as an ANC at Kwandebele.

MR TLEANE: No, that is not correct, Ma'am. As far as I am concerned, I was under the impression that Mr Ephrahim Mogale lived somewhere in the Northern Province, I did not know that he had a home in Kwandebele. It was the first time to hear of this information.

MS MTANGA: I have no further questions, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Ms Mtanga. Mr Knopp, have you got any questions?

MR KNOPP: Yes, thank you, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Go ahead.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR KNOPP: Mr Tleane, was there any tension between the ANC and SANCO?

MR TLEANE: Yes, there were tensions.

MR KNOPP: What was the problem?

MR TLEANE: Yesterday I indicated a part of those problems, I said when the exiles returned and those who were on Robben Island were released, some animosity began to emerge within the MDM formations in regard to who should lead the new ANC structures that were going to be launched in the township, and ever since those tensions, those animosities have actually doubled, if I may use that term.

The other reason which was not presented yesterday is that within the Civic Movement itself, this is now beyond SANCO, seeing that we are now in the new organisation that is NACO, we share a view that says beyond 1994, civil society organisations such as Civics and the Labour Movement should begin to consider you know, moving away from political party whims and government, so that they could be able to stand up and talk on the interests and aspirations of their members, without having to look back over their shoulders if the political parties are happy or not.

That is why we basically left SANCO and formed NACO, because we believed that the country needs a formidable, a powerful civil society organisation that can correctly comprehend the problems experienced by ordinary poor residents on the ground and strive to ensure that social transformation happens at a pace determined by the poor residents themselves.

MR KNOPP: Mr Tleane, did you know Mr Patrick Thwala?

MR TLEANE: Yes. I started knowing Mr Patrick Thwala around 1977 or thereabouts. We were working together for a company in Elandsfontein in the Germiston area, called KSB Pumps.

In the '80s we were together in the mass democratic movement. That is how I happened to know Patrick Thwala. And during my school days I used to stay with my aunt in the same section as Patrick Thwala, that is Emangweni Section in Thembisa.

MR KNOPP: Mr Tleane, did you know Mr Thabiso Radebe?

MR TLEANE: Yes, I knew Mr Thabiso Radebe also as being a member of the Mass Democratic Movement and we were also together in prison during the State of Emergency around 1986, sorry '87, somewhere there, at Modder B Prison.

MR KNOPP: And the one victim, Mr Songo, you knew him also?

MR TLEANE: Yes. I indicated yesterday that we were together at high school with Mr Songo. He was actually my classmate in the '70s, at Thembisa High. Later on he became a Councillor and I took another road. That is how I knew Mr Songo.

MR KNOPP: And that council of which he became a Councillor, was that considered an apartheid structure?

MR TLEANE: Yes, Sir.

MR KNOPP: And then Mr Songo became involved in the Thembisa Home Seekers Association, as a leader.

MR TLEANE: Yes.

MR KNOPP: What was SANCO's attitude towards that Home Seekers Association?

MR TLEANE: It was not an organisation of significance to us, in the sense that concerned itself mainly with land invasion, while on the other hand Thembisa Residents Association concerned itself with the striving for better services to legal or lawful home owners from the municipality.

As I indicated yesterday, Mr Songo finally operated in the Ivory Park area, that is in Midrand and not in Thembisa.

MR KNOPP: Mr Tleane, concerning Rev Namane's death, the other victim, how did you get to know about that victim's death?

MR TLEANE: Well Mr Namane's killing was big news in Thembisa. He had been a Civic leader in the township for some time, so obviously the matter was reported in the media, particularly the local newspaper, the Thembisan. That is when I happened to know about Mr Namane's death.

MR KNOPP: So it was the talk of the town so to speak?

MR TLEANE: Please repeat that question.

MR KNOPP: The death of the late Rev Namane was the talk of the town.

MR TLEANE: Yes in a way, yes, Sir.

MR KNOPP: Was the Rev Namane aligned to the PAC?

MR TLEANE: The information that I have is that yes, he was indeed a member of the Pan Africanist Congress of Azania. He never told me so himself but you know, that is coming from the general information that was doing the rounds in the township at that time.

MR KNOPP: In 1992, were you operating a business from your home?

MR TLEANE: It was not a business per se, I was doing what I'm doing now, I was selling a few drinks to my colleagues. My colleagues used to come in at home and so on. Just after our release from the State of Emergency, most of us were out of work and other things and it was decided that I should start selling these drinks so that when they came in it should not just be a visit, it should also compensate you know, for my livelihood. So it was not a shebeen per se, but I was serving only very, very close associates. I'm still in the process of continuing with that.

MR KNOPP: So was your house then a meeting place for political activists, if I can put it that way?

MR TLEANE: Not necessarily a meeting place, but when my colleagues came obviously there were always the issues to discuss about. Formal meetings took place at the Thembe shopping mall, that is where our offices were situated.

MR KNOPP: I want to come now to the instance concerning the motor car of Mr Mathlo.

MR TLEANE: Yes, Sir.

MR KNOPP: That's Mr Julius Mathlo.

MR TLEANE: Yes.

MR KNOPP: You acquired this motor car from Julius Mathlo ...(intervention)

MR TLEANE: On a Friday, the 21st I think, of August.

MR KNOPP: ... for the use of the applicant.

MR TLEANE: Yes, Sir.

MR KNOPP: The applicant has testified that you acquired this car for him in order to assist him with his mission, which was to eliminate the victim Songo. You've told this Tribunal something else, you've given another version to this Tribunal. What I want to canvass with you now is what you told Julius Mathlo in order to persuade him to give the car.

MR TLEANE: What is your question, Sir?

MR KNOPP: The question is, what did you tell Julius Mathlo in order to persuade him to acquire the car for the use of the applicant.

MR TLEANE: Thank you, Sir. I said to Mr Mathlo, who is the gentlemen who was at that time already over 80 years old, I told him that the vehicle was going to be used by the Civic leadership who were going to hold a meeting in town that particular weekend. The meeting was starting on Friday and it would end on Saturday and the car would be returned on Saturday.

The reason I did that was to ensure that Mr Mathlo would lend the car so that Mr Mohale could utilise it. I was concerned about the fact that if I told Mr Mathlo the truth, that Mr Mohale was actually driving his car to Standerton, which was such a long distance - and we are talking here about the Tredia, which is a very, very old car, I was sure that Mr Mathlo was not going to agree to give the car to Mr Mohale.

The other reason, the other reason that compelled me to make this statement to Mr Mathlo - in fact there were two other reasons, the one reason is that before the exiles actually returned home, the leadership of the liberation movement actually appealed to the peace-loving people of this country, those who cherished freedom and the democratisation of the country, that each and every one of us should be as helpful as possible towards those that will be returning home to fast track the process of reintegration. That was the one reason.

The other one was that in 1992, during that period, all over the country including Thembisa, there was general excitement you know, amongst the disadvantaged communities because of the fact that people were coming back home, those who were in prison were coming out and so on, there was a lot of optimism that was happening. There was excitement you know, of seeing you know, soldiers coming back home and so on, the possibility of freedom finally happening, was now becoming a reality. So there was a lot of optimism. I felt compelled as a citizen, as an activist, to do my best to try and help Comrade Mohale who had also just returned from exile. Those were the reasons that compelled me to actually make the statement that I made to Mr Mathlo.

MR KNOPP: So Mr Tleane, you concede then that you lied to Julius Mathlo in order to obtain this vehicle?

MR TLEANE: Yes, yes. I thought it was for a good cause, I still think so.

MR KNOPP: So the means justify the end. As long as the ultimate cause is good, one can do anything.

MR TLEANE: Not necessarily in that context, Sir. I think it is important to understand the mood that was prevalent at that time you know. Exiles as I've already indicated, had just come back home, the general spirit inside the country was that we needed to make sure that we welcome these people and we help them as much as possible. This is what I did. He was not the only person that had approached me. I indicated that yesterday.

Other people that came in from exile, they approached the office for financial assistance, others came in for housing purposes and so on. Some of their homes were bombed during their absence and so on. They came to our office. If we could, we tried to help those people. It was in that particular context that I helped Mr Mohale. Yes, I had to lie. During those days it was sometimes necessary to tell lies in the advancement of course of the cause. And I believe that this is exactly what was happening.

CHAIRPERSON: Did Mr Mathlo know the applicant at all?

MR TLEANE: No, he didn't know the applicant, but I did explain to him who he was.

CHAIRPERSON: Did the applicant have a driver's licence?

MR TLEANE: I think he said he acquired on in exile, I think that is what he told me. I'm not very sure, Sir, but I think this is what he told me.

CHAIRPERSON: Did he show you anything?

MR TLEANE: No, I didn't ask him to produce - I don't remember asking him to ...(end of side A of tape) ... but I think there was a discussion about a licence and I think he said he acquired one while he was outside of the country.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Mr Knopp?

MR KNOPP: Thank you, Mr Chairman, that was the other point that I was coming to.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh, Sorry. I'd also thought that the end justifies the means.

MR KNOPP: You specifically told Julius Mathlo had the applicant had a valid driver's licence.

MR TLEANE: Well I can't remember now if I did that, but I must have done so. If Mr Mohale had told me that he had one, obviously I must have told that to Mr Mathlo.

MR KNOPP: Well I'm just referring to the evidence which you gave in the High court, on page 188 of the record, where you testified -

MR TLEANE: Well I've just indicated, Sir, that I don't remember, but I think I remember Mr Mohale mentioning to me that he acquired a licence while he was in exile.

MR KNOPP: Mr Chairman, just for the Panel's benefit, the Panel is not in possession of the transcript of the evidence in the High court, but I am in possession of most of that transcript. That's what I'm referring to now.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I think you can proceed with that, I mean both you and Mr Tleane have an edge on us there, but it might not be so important from our perspective. If there a dispute between the two of you and it's necessary to actually have regard to that, then we could do that.

MR KNOPP: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

MR LAX: Just give us the page reference again, just so I can make a note of it in case it becomes relevant.

MR KNOPP: Page 188 of the transcript of the High court.

MR LAX: Thanks.

MR KNOPP: I put to you further, Mr Tleane, that the applicant did not have a valid driver's licence at the time.

MR TLEANE: I cannot dispute that, Sir, but I think my understanding at that time is that he had a licence. The other motivation for that is that he was driving George Biela's cars around frequently.

MR KNOPP: No, that is correct, he was driving George Biela's car.

MR TLEANE: So I presumed that he had a licence. You don't travel from Thembisa to Standerton without a licence, there's a possibility that you can be stopped by the police or the traffic police and so on, there could be problems. I presumed that he was licensed, that is why his family could give him you know, their cars to move around with in the township.

MR KNOPP: Yes. But Mr Tleane, my point is this, that you made a representation to Julius Mathlo concerning a valid driver's licence of the applicant, at a time when you had not satisfied yourself by inspecting a valid driver's licence.

MR TLEANE: Sir, I don't think it is correct to say I had not satisfied myself that Mr Mohale did not have a valid driver's licence. I think it would be convenient for me, it would be in my interests in this Tribunal, to quickly say yes, Mr Mohale said that he had a licence and so on, to strengthen my case, but I'm saying my memory is not all that strong, I'm 44 years old now you know. I say I think I recall Mr Mohale indicating to me that he had actually acquired a licence while he was out in exile.

So I've got to come here and tell the truth, I don't have to become an opportunist, and I've indicated that I think that he actually indicated to me that he acquired that licence. I think that serves the purpose.

MR KNOPP: The other aspect about the motorcar is this. After the applicant had completed his mission regarding the victim Songo, he did not return the motor vehicle to the owner who was Julius Mathlo, he returned the motor vehicle to you.

MR TLEANE: Yes, that is correct. Yes, Sir.

MR KNOPP: Is your evidence that you were really friendly with George Biela, there wasn't a close relationship with the applicant?

MR TLEANE: Sir, since the first time when Mr Mohale was pointed out to me and when Mr Mohale actually came into the office to request for transportational assistance. I think that happened within a period of about two weeks or so, it could be slightly more than that or slightly just below that, I don't think it is possible to strike a good relationship with a person that was a total stranger with you, in that particular period.

I had come to know that he was George Biela's brother-in-law, but I don't think we had reached a stage where he could now become my friend. George Biela was my friend, he still remains my friend.

In the High court trial, George Biela, Mr Mohale's brother-in-law, actually testified as my own witness. He was my witness in the High court matter. That indicates clearly how close I am with George Biela. I don't think George Biela would have chosen to testify for me you know, and not for his brother-in-law, if we were friends.

MR KNOPP: But the point is this, you went out of your way, you lied to an owner of a motorcar in order to obtain a motorcar for the use of a person that you weren't even close to.

MR TLEANE: Sir, if an opportunity presented itself again to me, a cadre came in, an activist, someone who went into exile and makes sacrifices for the liberation of my country, I would do it again. That was the spirit then. If that opportunity came again, I think I would do it again.

I was helping someone that was known in the township to have just come back from exile, someone who was an ANC members, and I'm saying there was that excitement at that time. I repeat that if the opportunity presented itself again, I would do it, Sir. I didn't have any reason to suspect at that time that there was something peculiar about Mr Mohale's conduct, that would then encourage me not to proceed and help Mr Mohale.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Knopp?

MR KNOPP: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

The victim, Mr Songo, did you come across him after this instance on the 11th of September 1993, at a meeting at the City Council's office in Kempton Park?

MR TLEANE: Sir, I may not be sure about the date obviously, but yes, there was a particular incident where local organisations attended a meeting convened by the Kempton Park City Council, which was to discuss about developmental issues in Thembisa. Mr Songo also attended that particular meeting.

MR KNOPP: And a certain incident happened in the middle of the meeting.

MR TLEANE: Yes, Sir.

MR KNOPP: Can you tell the Tribunal about that incident?

MR TLEANE: I can't quote the incident verbatim, but what transpired is that while we were proceeding with issues on the agenda, out of the blue you know, Mr Songo just barged in and started accusing me and said that I had hired certain people to go and kill him and so on. I was very angry.

There was chaos in that meeting. Finally I left that meeting with my own delegation because I was very, very fed-up. I thought it was not correct for Mr Songo to approach me in that manner in that type of a public meeting and make that serious accusation against me. Mind you, that was before the matter was even finalised in court. The matter was still in the hands of the police.

MR KNOPP: So his attempted murder wasn't part of the agenda of that meeting at the City Hall?

MR TLEANE: No, it wasn't. I don't think the council will call a meeting, Sir, to discuss about attempted murders and so on.

MR KNOPP: Were you concerned about Mr Songo's attitude towards you?

MR TLEANE: I was concerned about Mr Songo's attitude after he had actually uttered those words that he uttered.

MR KNOPP: Who was the Chairman of that meeting?

MR TLEANE: I can't remember. It was one of the officials of the council, I can't remember. It could have been the CEO, it could have been the Chairman of the Executive Committee, I can't remember. But it was members of the old Kempton Park City Council.

MR KNOPP: Right. Then on the 18th of December 1994, was there another meeting of organisations including the ANC, at Rabe(?) Ridge Hall?

MR TLEANE: Yes, once more I am not sure about the date, but there was another incident there.

MR KNOPP: And what was that incident?

MR TLEANE: I think Mr Songo tried to speak to Mr Izak Mahlango, the current Mayor of the Kyalami Metropolitan Council, to indicate that there was this problem between himself and myself which he wanted Mr Mahlango to facilitate.

I think Mr Songo was looking for some kind of a meeting where political organisations, including Mr Songo's, would sit down and try and discuss this matter. I think I pulled Mr Mahlango aside and related the incident that happened at the Kempton Park meeting. I also reminded Mr Mahlango that this is a police matter, we don't think it would be correct for us to try and discuss this matter as organisations. This is a very, very serious matter and I don't think I would be prepared to be part of any meetings that would be convened by political organisations to try and deal with this issue. Such a meeting never took place.

MR KNOPP: Alright. Can we move on to Ashley Sesing's evidence.

MR TLEANE: Yes, Sir.

MR KNOPP: You knew Ashley Sesing?

MR TLEANE: I indicated yesterday Sir, that I knew Mr Sesing as being one of the young lions you know, the younger members of the Mass Democratic Movement organisations.

MR KNOPP: Would I be correct in saying that Sesing and the applicant would have regarded you as a leader in the community?

MR TLEANE: That is not true, Sir. I'm going to indicate to this Tribunal why it is not true. When Mr Mohale left for exile, in my view Mr Mohale did not even know about me. I don't think he was politically involved at that time, although he claims that he was. That is the one matter.

But I think the other matter is that when he came back he still did not know me, he only happened to know me for about a week or two. For him to immediately repeat that I am his leader, I am his leader, is very, very strange to me. That is the one matter.

As far as Mr Sesing is concerned, Mr Sesing is still very, very young. When I happened to know him I think he was in the SRCs or things like those. He might have been in the youth structures you know, of the Mass Democratic Movement and so on. He was more within the youth structures than the Civic body. In 1992, the ANC was already launched in the township, they youth then in the township were more aligned to the ANC than to the Civic body. Yesterday I indicated the antagonisms that had already developed between the Civic Movement and the ANC. Now for a young man such as Mr Sesing to come in here and claim that here is Mr Tleane, he's my leader, even now he's my leader, I think he made that statement conveniently.

MR KNOPP: I want to more onto another aspect now.

MR TLEANE: Yes, Sir.

MR KNOPP: That's the legal representation of the applicant who was accused 1 in the High court.

MR TLEANE: Yes, Sir.

MR KNOPP: Up until I took over the defence of the applicant in the High court, he was represented by a certain Adv de Kota(?), is that correct?

MR TLEANE: I remember the name, yes, de Kota.

MR KNOPP: And that legal representation was paid for out of the funds of SANCO's coffins.

MR TLEANE: Yes, Sir.

MR KNOPP: And at a certain stage, as you have testified yourself and Maseko ...(intervention)

MR TLEANE: Mr Paul Maseko?

MR KNOPP: Yes. ... George Biela.

MR TLEANE: Mandla Gumede.

MR KNOPP: Mandla Gumede.

MR TLEANE: Yes, Sir.

MR KNOPP: ... went to visit the applicant in Leeukop Prison.

MR TLEANE: Yes, Sir, this was after Mr Mohale himself had already phoned the Thembisa branch, had already phoned the office and that specific request. The other thing that was also contained in Mr Mohale's request, which I believe also persuaded the organisation to think favourably in terms of this particular request, was that Mr Mohale was indicating to the office that he intended revealing in court that there was some kind of a conspiracy that was happening, that would then also assist in clearing the facts about who did what and so on and so on. And I think the organisation was encouraged because this is what we wanted to happen. We believed that there was a conspiracy, that is why I became the scapegoat which still contends that there is a conspiracy that is involved here.

They went to prison after Mr Mohale had not just once, but on quite a number of occasions, phoned the Thembisa office and made that particular request. At that stage I was already the Secretary of SANCO in the Gauteng Province. The information was related to us by the sub-structure.

MR KNOPP: Are you contending this was a political conspiracy?

MR TLEANE: We still contend so, Sir. We are not sure about the players that are involved in this conspiracy, but I think in Mr Mohale's testimony he indicated that there's quite a number of people who claim to be police, who visited him while he was in prison. Ultimately he decided that he was going to make certain confessions and so on and so on.

We don't have the facts, we don't have the evidence, but we believed very, very strongly that because of the animosities that existed between the Civic body and the local ANC, also because of the fact that I had resigned from the Kempton Park/Thembisa local authority, where I was Mayor in 1996. Because of differences between the views of the Civic Movement and those of the ANC, certain individuals were not happy about the situation and as a result I may have been regarded to be uncooperative or problematic and so on, so something had to be concocted.

As I've indicated, I'm not sure about the exact facts, but time will tell. Maybe beyond this Tribunal you know, facts will still come onto the table so that we can know exactly what happened. But we believe very strongly that there were underhands insofar as these matters are concerned.

MR KNOPP: So is it your contention that this political conspiracy had the object of falsely implicating you in the murder of the victim, Songo?

MR TLEANE: In both matters, Sir, not necessarily Mr Songo's. I was charged for the murder case, I was charged for the attempted murder case, I was charged for the arms and all these things. I was acquitted on the arms charges even before the matter was concluded, because my defence requested the matter to - the judge, to actually discharge me from all those charges.

MR KNOPP: Are you're talking about referring to a Section 174, acquittal in terms of the Criminal Procedure Act?

MR TLEANE: Sir, as an advocate you will come to my assistance. Obviously you are aware that I'm a lay person, I may not know which Sections you refer to, but I hope before I leave this world, that I'll be able to reach the type of educational levels that you have had an opportunity to reach, Sir.

MR KNOPP: And now you've issued summons against the Minister of Safety and Security, for civil damages.

MR TLEANE: Yes, Sir, I've done that, Sir.

MR KNOPP: But why have you done that?

MR TLEANE: I believe it is correct. My name, my credibility was damaged through this matter. The case was reported in the media, the print media, the electronic media and so on, "The Former Mayor of Kempton Park Arrested for Murder" and all these things. A lot of money was involved in paying you know, legal fees and so on. And I believe, I believe very strongly that the Namane family, the Songo families, also reserve a right to continuously point a finger at me, although I think it is not justified.

Although I think that the process of the High court trial and the process of the Tribunal itself, may have assisted them to begin to realise that the suspicions that they have about me are not justified. But that does not remove the fact that my name, my image, my credibility in the community was actually dented. I feel it is correct for me to take the stance that I have taken.

MR KNOPP: Mr Tleane, I put to you that SANCO is not a wealthy organisation and to fork R35 000 for the legal defence of the applicant in the High court, that was a difficult thing to do.

MR TLEANE: Well Sir, I've already explained that both myself and Mr Mohale were members of SANCO, by virtue of being residents. We don't assist people who have cards, who had taken out cards and so on only. In the township when there are problems, any type of problems, people come to the office, they are not asked for their membership cards before they get assistance. So when Mr Mohale approached the office and presented his matter as he did and also indicated that he did not believe that if he proceeded with an advocate from the Legal Aid, he was going to be able to expose this conspiracy, the organisation was then persuaded. SANCO Gauteng Province has a company by the name of Sinamandla, an investment wing, Sinamandla. The money actually came, not necessarily from SANCO per se, but it came from Sinamandla Investments. We believed that it was for a good cause.

MR KNOPP: Mr Tleane, I put this to you in the High court under cross-examination, namely that the applicant never called for assistance, legal representation from SANCO.

MR TLEANE: No, Sir, that is not true, that is a false statement. The reason why Mr George Biela had to be a part of all that process was precisely to guard against such allegations coming up at a later stage. Mr Biela was part of the delegation, as a member of that family, to ensure that there was nothing underhand insofar as this particular request is made. So if Mr Mohale had not phoned the office, I don't think anybody would have gone to prison. That includes his own brother-in-law, Mr George Biela.

In fact, Mr George Biela testified in court, if you will remember Sir, that his family, the Mohale family and the Biela family were actually happy to realise that there was this request that was made by Mr Mohale, which the organisation was accepting. He was indicating that the two families were not going to be in a position to can raise the kind of funds that were necessary to try and make a bail application for Mr Mohale. The statement was made by Mr Mohale's brother-in-law on behalf of the family in court, in the High court trial.

MR KNOPP: I'm putting to you now what I've already put to you in the High court and to Mr Mandla Gumede, who was called to testify as your defence witness.

MR TLEANE: Yes, Sir.

MR KNOPP: That the purpose of this delegation going to the applicant in Leeukop Prison, was to attempt to get him to testify in such a manner that you would not be implicated at all at the trial.

MR TLEANE: Sir, we don't need to be academics or highly learned people to realise that that version is not correct. When we reached a stage of appearing in court, Mr Mohale had already made his confessions, there was no way in which he could try himself to change those confessions. Okay? There was therefore no way in whmch we would have succeeded to try and persuade him to change these things.

So that version Sir, with due respect, is not correct at all. How would you change - at least you are a legal person, how could you possibly try and change these things? Because all of us had copies of Mr Mohale's confessions by then, which were distributed once the matter started. How could that have happened? You can't go there and change stories and so on, it would have worked against him if he did that, it would have complicated his case in any case. So that was definitely not our view.

Mr Mohale had already made those statements, he implicated me in Mr Songo's case, he implicated Mr Radebe and Mr Thwala in Mr Namane's case. How on earth could we have been able, even if we had the best legal team in the world, I don't think we would have succeeded to try and twist these things around, I don't think so, Sir.

MR KNOPP: You see, Mr Tleane, a confession in our law is only evidence against the person that makes the confession, the confession is not evidence against a co-accused. So that confession couldn't be used as evidence against you.

MR TLEANE: All I'm trying to say, Sir, I'm not necessarily a legal person, in simplistic terms I'm trying to say if he had made that confession that I was implicated in Mr Songo's matter and Mr Thwala and Mr Radebe were implicated in Mr Namane's matter, how were we going to try and juggle these facts around in court. Whether the confession worked against me or against him, I think that is a secondary matter. The primary matter is, how were these facts going to be juggled around?

MR KNOPP: I'm putting to you, Mr Tleane, as I put to you already in the High court, that the purpose of, the whole idea of paying for the legal representation of the applicant was so that he shouldn't implicate you in the trial.

MR TLEANE: Well I still repeat Sir, that is not correct.

MR KNOPP: Just to advance this aspect, the complication came in when my predecessor, the other counsel, was compelled to withdraw from the case because he felt that he couldn't do justice either to his client or to the court, he had a conflict.

MR TLEANE: Sir, I don't know the exact reasons that broke the agreement or the contract between Mr Mohale and his legal team. If it was our intention to use that particular situation to try and make things easier for myself, all we had to do was to use my own legal team to represent Mr Mohale. That would have made things very, very easy and then, we would then have been in a position to manipulate things and so on, as it is being suspected at this stage. So he got a new team altogether, they started having problems and so on and then the agreement was terminated.

My experience of Mr Mohale, during the High court trial and during this tribunal here, is that Mr Mohale appears to be a highly temperamental person, a highly emotional person you know.

I don't know if you have not had the same problems with him already and so on during the trial and during the Tribunal here. I think that also played a part in Mr Mohale actually terminating his mandate with his previous legal team, it had nothing to do with us. If I wanted to manipulate, why use another legal team, why not use this one you know, so that ...(indistinct) give instructions to that man. It will be much easier. Why organise a new team altogether if you want to fabricate things?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Knopp.

MR KNOPP: I just want to put to you that in the High court, when you testified about the applicant who was accused 1, on page 186 of the record, you testified that accused 1 was a withdrawn person, he was reserved.

MR TLEANE: In which particular context are you, do you want us to talk about that? Do I have that in my package or what?

MR KNOPP: It's not in your package, I'm just putting it to you that that is how you described accused 1's behaviour when you testified in the High court, that he was a withdrawn person and he was reserved.

MR TLEANE: It's nearly similar to what I've just indicated here, he's temperamental and so on. He's performing right now, he was performing yesterday, he was performing on Monday also. It's precisely what I'm trying to describe to the Tribunal, Sir. You may have used different words, but I think the effect is the same.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, can we move on from the character of the applicant, I don't know whether it's going to assist us in deciding amnesty here.

MR KNOPP: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Perhaps if it deals with the merits of this application, it might be of some greater assistance.

MR KNOPP: Thank you.

You've heard the version of the applicant, namely that it was yourself that engaged the applicant and Sesing to murder the victim, Songo. What do you say about that?

MR TLEANE: Sir, that is incorrect. I gave no instructions to anybody, I had no reasons. When something happens there must be a motivation. I've indicated to the Tribunal, I've indicated in the High court, Mr Songo was no threat to me as much as Mr Namane was no threat to me and to the organisations. I gave no ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, we have noted, you don't need to repeat. The testimony has been noted, so ...

MR KNOPP: I put to you further that the only reason that you acquired the motor vehicle for the use of the applicant was for him to achieve his mission, to use the car in order to kill Songo.

MR TLEANE: That is not true, Sir. Even if I was that type of person, I think I would have used a faster and new, a brand new fast car that could move swiftly around and so on, not an old Tredia.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes again, Mr Tleane, ...(intervention)

MR TLEANE: My apologies.

CHAIRPERSON: ... it may very well be in your own interest just to respond directly to the Advocate's questions.

MR TLEANE: My apologies, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: And it might even assist us as well to get our work done.

MR TLEANE: Okay. Thank you, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Knopp.

MR KNOPP: I'm further putting to you that the applicant as he had in the past used George Biela's motorcar and the family's vehicles, he had no need to obtain a vehicle through your offices if he needed it for personal use, in other words to take his mother to Standerton. He could have use the family vehicles, he wouldn't have had to come to you cap in hand asking for the use of the vehicle.

MR TLEANE: Sir, I wish to heed your call that I should be very brief, but I think there is a fact that I need to raise with the Tribunal insofar as this question is concerned. Mr Knopp's question is not valid in the sense that yesterday here it was the first time that I got this information. Mr Thwala testified, I did not know of this information before, that Mr Mohale actually acquired another vehicle from a certain attorney in the township. He had to produce a gun and all those things. It appeared from time to time Mr Mohale had problems with transport and so and so on, so to suggest that he could have used Mr George Biela's car, I don't think that is quite in order.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Knopp.

MR KNOPP: I also put to you that during the mission, as the applicant has testified and Sesing, they had to come to report to you about the mission and they needed money for petrol which you provided to assist them and that you then told them they should now hurry up in completing the mission because the owner of the car wanted his car back.

MR TLEANE: That is not correct, Sir, soldiers don't report to civilians.

MR KNOPP: I put to you further that as the applicant has testified, it has always been the tradition in the ANC for the military to operate on the directions of the political leaders.

MR TLEANE: Well Sir, that is a very complex question. I've made it very clear that at no stage did I hold office in any other organisation, I've always been in the Civic Movement. I don't know how the intricate policies of the ANC work insofar as how their soldiers take orders and so on, but as far as the Civic Movement is concerned, ours is not to give orders to anybody to do anything, we deal with bread and butter issues. We protest, we march, we hold banners and all those things, that is all.

MR KNOPP: I'm putting to you further, Mr Tleane, that once the mission had been carried out or partly carried out - I say partly because Mr Songo survived, you then abandoned the applicant and attempted to distance yourself from the mission.

MR TLEANE: That is not true, Sir. I've indicated I only knew him for about two weeks before this problem started, so I could not abandon him because he was never close to me.

MR KNOPP: Thank you, I have no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Knopp. Ms Vilakazi, have you got any questions?

MS VILAKAZI: Well I have not more than two questions to Mr Tleane.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Please go ahead.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS VILAKAZI: Mr Tleane, I'm not representing Mr Songo, so whatever I'll be asking you about relates to the Namane family because I'm representing that family.

MR TLEANE: Yes, Ma'am.

MS VILAKAZI: You have in your evidence referred several times to tensions which prevailed between different political organisations and within the Civic Movement as well. You have also made reference to a conspiracy and you have also made mention of the fact that your personal image has been dented by all these happenings. Now my question to you is, as a member of the community having been involved and having been a prominent member in the Thembisa community and having known Mr Namane, who was also active within the Thembisa community and having known as well the fact that Mr Namane's death was talked about a lot within the Thembisa community, in your pursuit of exposing the conspiracy that you perceive exists, what information can you put to the Commission that will assist the Commission in establishing what the conspiracy involved and in that way they might be able to solve the riddle or the web pertaining to the death of Mr Namane?

MR TLEANE: Ma'am, I don't have any special information per se which I can divulge now, which I have not divulged already. I wish I had that type of information because I'm just as worried as the Namane family and also the Songo family, that we actually come to understand what really transpired there. But I've indicated a few moments ago that perhaps even beyond this Tribunal you know, a possibility, an opportunity could come, that new information actually comes to the fore that will finally lead to unscrambling this particular question. I would be happy to cooperate in that particular process for both families and for myself and for my organisation as well.

MS VILAKAZI: I have no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Ms Vilakazi. Has the Panel got any questions? Yes, Mr Knopp.

MR KNOPP: No further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh, thank you. Yes?

MR SIBANYONI: Very few, Mr Chairperson.

Mr Tleane, the fact that Mr Namane was involved in assisting people with housing, he had some plans, maybe we can say he was regarded as a developer, did it become a problem to your structure, to the Thembisa Residents Organisation or Association?

MR TLEANE: Sir, in my testimony yesterday I actually indicated that I did not even know Mr Namane from that angle, I only knew him as a member of the Thembisa Civic Association and also as being a PAC member. I happen to know for the first time during Mr Thwala's testimony, that Mr Namane was actually involved in housing. He may have been, I don't want to dispute that, but that is not how I knew him.

MR SIBANYONI: Mr Thwala also testified about the attempts to recruit people belonging to the old structure, the old Councils, to come back. That's the words he was using. Was Mr Songo maybe a threat that if he comes back he would be elected, he will occupy positions and you people who are coming from exile, you who are coming from prison wouldn't get positions maybe?

MR TLEANE: Fortunately I was neither from prison nor from exile, Sir, although I was detained from time to time. I had already been based inside, so you know that situation would not have prevailed. But in my testimony I indicated that for instance when the then Mayor, Mr Mothiba, joined the democratic movement he did not do so willingly, certain pressures were actually exerted on him as well as on other people you know. His businesses were bombed and other things and SOCON(?) etc., etc., then he resigned and then he joined the movement and the Council became discredited. Mr Songo has recently joined the ANC, I think last year. He's now a member of the ANC, as we speak.

MR SIBANYONI: In 1992, was he a stumbling block by refusing to stop participating in the old structures and joining your side?

MR TLEANE: No, Sir. The Council was actually dissolved. There was so much mass action in the township, progressive mass action in the township, there was a demand that was made that these Councils be dissolved because they represented nobody. And in 1993, finally, the then Transvaal Provincial Administration dissolved the Council and Mr Songo and the others, those who were still remaining there, including Mr Mothiba's successor, that was Mr More, they were dissolved and they become nothing. That's all.

MR SIBANYONI: At the stage the applicant needed transport you said you knew him for hardly two weeks.

MR TLEANE: Yes, Sir.

MR SIBANYONI: What made you to go out of your way to ensure that he gets the vehicle?

MR TLEANE: One, I'd indicated that he was introduced to me by his brother-in-law to be his brother-in-law, someone who had just come back from exile. That is the one thing that I indicated. I also indicated that a call was made by the leadership of the liberation movement that all of us should try to be as helpful as possible to those who had just come back into the country ...(intervention)

MR SIBANYONI: You said Mr Mathlo wouldn't agree if he knew that his car would be driven to Standerton ...(intervention)

MR TLEANE: The distance ...

MR SIBANYONI: ... the distance is too long.

MR TLEANE: I think I would also have a problem if that car belonged to me, the distance. The car I'm talking of is not a fancy car, Sir.

MR SIBANYONI: But why did you personally agree that it should be drive to Standerton?

MR TLEANE: I did not have a car of my own, I couldn't even drive. It was during the course of the day, most of the people who owned cars were at work and so on. Mr Mathlo was not just an ordinary resident, Mr Mathlo was the Chairman of one of our sectional committees, from time to time they frequented the office. That is why I thought of him because he was always in the office and he was driving this car. I thought the car would then be easily available.

MR SIBANYONI: But the crux of my question is, why would you agree that Mr Mathlo's car should be driven such a long distance, being an old Tredia car?

MR TLEANE: I knew for a fact that senior citizens always take care of their things, not necessarily cars, they take - I knew that in terms of roadworthiness, it would be able to reach that area if it was driven properly. I had no other alternative, that is why I banked on that car.

MR SIBANYONI: Did you know Mr Mabena who apparently took the applicant for hiding in Kwandebele?

MR TLEANE: I don't know which Mr Mabena, Mr Mohale may be referring to, because as a South African Sir, you know there are so many Mabenas here. The Mabenas, there are so many of them. Unless we are told specifically which one.

MR SIBANYONI: When he was in Kwandebele, did he come to you for assistance, logistical support?

MR TLEANE: I don't know that he went to Kwandebele and so on, Sir.

MR SIBANYONI: But were there some times when he was coming to you for logistical support?

MR TLEANE: No, no, no, Sir, not at any stage. He only came to me when he ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Tleane, it will help us, you have answered the question, you don't need to ...(intervention)

MR TLEANE: Alright, thank you, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: ... repeat the evidence.

MR TLEANE: Sometimes you know, you become emotional you know.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I understand.

MR SIBANYONI: Did Mr Songo aspire to be a Mayor at the time you were also in the, or you were about to be a Mayor?

MR TLEANE: I said I was a Mayor in 1995, after the new system had come into being. Where was Mr Songo then? I think Mr Songo was then with the PAC, he joined, Mr Songo later on joined the PAC and left it and joined another organisation. I can't remember the name of that organisation. He contested the elections, especially as a PAC member and later on as a member of this other community organisation, whose name I don't remember.

MR SIBANYONI: Thank you, Mr Chairperson, no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Anything? Ms Mtanga?

MS MTANGA: No questions, Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Mr Tleane, thank you very much, you are excused.

MR TLEANE: Thank you, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you for your trouble to come back today.

MR TLEANE: And thanks for accommodating my predicament yesterday about the examination, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. You're excused. Yes, Ms Mtanga, does that take care of the evidence that you intended to present?

MS MTANGA: Yes, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well. Now Ms Vilakazi, have you got firm instructions, is there any evidence you are going to tender?

MS VILAKAZI: Thank you, Mr Chairman, I'm not going to call any witnesses, the Namane's submission will be part of my closing argument.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well. Thank you, Ms Vilakazi. Now Mr Knopp, you have indicated that should you reach this stage you would need a bit of time. We have indicated that we would be amenable to that request, your colleagues will gladly, it seems, agree to go along with that. So under those circumstances we will adjourn this application for argument tomorrow morning at 9 o'clock in this venue.

MR KNOPP: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well. So we'll excuse you at this stage.

Yes, Ms Mtanga, what remains?

MS MTANGA: The next matter is the application of Mr Makola.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------CHAIRPERSON: Mr Makola. Is he here?

MS MTANGA: Yes, he is Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. And who represents him?

MS MTANGA: Adv Makhubele.

CHAIRPERSON: Adv Makhubele. I've seen her somewhere there. Yes, there she is. The next matter that we will be attending to is the application of Mr V Z Makola, amnesty reference 7505/97.

The Panel is constituted as would be apparent from the record. For the applicant is Adv Makhubele. Ms Vilakazi, I assume you appear for the victims?

MS VILAKAZI: I appear for the family of Benedict Modikwa.

CHAIRPERSON: I'm sorry, say again.

MS VILAKAZI: I appear for the family of Benedict Modikwa.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Ms Vilakazi. And then the Leader of Evidence is Ms Mtanga. Are there any other victims, Ms Mtanga?

MS MTANGA: Yes, Chairperson, the other victims were notified but they have not attended the hearing.

CHAIRPERSON: Have they not come forward.

MS MTANGA: No, Chairperson, they've not come forward.

CHAIRPERSON: They've been formally notified?

MS MTANGA: Yes, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: The only victim that is responded is Benedict Modikwa.

MS MTANGA: Yes, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well. Yes, Ms Makhubele, is there anything that you want to put on record, or do you want your client to take the oath?

MS MAKHUBELE: Thank you, Mr Chairman. I want my client to take the oath. I will lead him in his evidence.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well. Mr Makola, can you hear the interpretation? You can hear that. Can you please switch on the microphone and stand. Are you full names Vusi Zakariah Makola?

VUSI ZAKARIAH MAKOLA: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, you can sit down. Just sit a bit more closer to this microphone, go a bit forward. Yes, Ms Makhubele.

EXAMINATION BY MS MAKHUBELE: Mr Makola, you are the applicant in this matter.

MR MAKOLA: Yes.

MS MAKHUBELE: How old are you?

MR MAKOLA: 25 years.

MS MAKHUBELE: Where do you stay?

MR MAKOLA: Vosloorus township.

MS MAKHUBELE: During 19 - rather, before I get there, how far did you go with your education?

MR MAKOLA: Standard two.

MS MAKHUBELE: When did you leave school?

MR MAKOLA: 1988.

MS MAKHUBELE: During 1993, you were convicted of three murders and an attempt on murder as well as possession of firearms and ammunition, is this correct?

MR MAKOLA: Yes.

MS MAKHUBELE: Which court convicted you?

MR MAKOLA: The Supreme court.

MS MAKHUBELE: Where?

MR MAKOLA: In Johannesburg.

MS MAKHUBELE: What's your sentence on this?

MR MAKOLA: 36 years.

MS MAKHUBELE: You are currently serving this sentence at Leeukop Prison.

MR MAKOLA: Yes.

MS MAKHUBELE: It's in respect of these convictions that you are here today to apply for amnesty.

MR MAKOLA: That's correct.

MS MAKHUBELE: The first conviction related to the murder of one, Humphrey Khumalo, at Vosloorus.

MR MAKOLA: That's correct.

MS MAKHUBELE: Did you know him?

MR MAKOLA: Yes, I knew him by seeing him.

MS MAKHUBELE: Do you know if he belonged to any political organisation?

MR MAKOLA: Yes, I do.

MS MAKHUBELE: Which one?

MR MAKOLA: He was a member of the IFP Youth Brigade.

MS MAKHUBELE: At the time of his killing, were you a member of any political organisation, which one if so?

MR MAKOLA: I was a member of the ANC.

MS MAKHUBELE: Were you a card-carrying member?

MR MAKOLA: Yes, that's correct.

MS MAKHUBELE: Did you have any position in the ANC structure at Vosloorus?

MR MAKOLA: No.

MS MAKHUBELE: Other than being a member of the ANC, were you a member of any other organisation that was aligned to the ANC?

MR MAKOLA: I was a member of the SDU.

MS MAKHUBELE: What is SDU?

MR MAKOLA: That's Self Protection Unit.

MS MAKHUBELE: Or Defence Unit?

MR MAKOLA: Yes, that's correct, Self Defence Unit.

MS MAKHUBELE: Since when?

MR MAKOLA: From 1992.

MS MAKHUBELE: What was the structure of this Self Defence Unit? Who was your Commander?

MR MAKOLA: My Commander was killed in 1992, on the 7th of July. His name was George Skamora Machel. After his death we received our instructions from Mr Makudela, whom we also referred to as Mr Mandela.

MS MAKHUBELE: Can you describe the political situation at Vosloorus during this period, specifically with reference to the first incident, the death of Humphrey Khumalo.

MR MAKOLA: There was a division in Vosloorus, there were two sides. There was a section belonging to the IFP and the other section belonged to the ANC. In this IFP section it was not easy for a member of the ANC to go there maybe wearing an ANC T-shirt or if they knew that you are a member of the ANC.

Even in the Sotho section it wouldn't be easy to enter that area if you wore an IFP T-shirt or a National Party T-shirt or any organisation that was against the ANC. It would be difficult for you to enter that section, that is Basotho section.

MS MAKHUBELE: In most townships there were hostels, what was the position in Vosloorus, was there a hostel?

MR MAKOLA: Yes, there were two hostels. There was a hostel belonging to Basotho and the other one belonged to AmaZulu. In this Zulu hostel, that's where I shot Humphrey, though I have forgotten his surname. I shot him at Dubazana Street, not exactly inside the hostel.

MS MAKHUBELE: Okay, let's go directly to the actual killing of Humphrey, you said you knew him. On the day of his death, where did you meet him and what happened?

MR MAKOLA: I met Humphrey at Dubazana Street. We went to Dubazana Street because we were on our way to Mr Makhubela's place and there was another comrade that we went to collect at Dube Street, so we were forced to use Dubazana Street. That's how we entered Dubazana Street.

MS MAKHUBELE: Then when you met him, what happened?

MR MAKOLA: From that house that we had visited, I met them outside. I would say that they were waiting for me because when I appeared, he said to me "Yes, Comrade Chisa?" When he said that, I said to him "If you don't want to greet me, please do not talk to me". While I was still talking to him, those who were in his company tried to attack me with knives. I was concentrating on Humphrey. When he put his hand on his waist I thought that he had a gun.

Among these people who were in my company I was the only person who was armed with a 3.65 gun. When he put his hand on his waist, I took out my firearm and then he said to me I shouldn't scare him with a toy. When he said that, I shot once at his chest. He came towards me and then I shot him for the second time and that is when he kneeled down. Then I went away. We ran out of that section because we were really in a difficult situation in that area.

MS MAKHUBELE: In your trial evidence was led to the effect that you shot him because he called you "Comrade Chisa". What do you say to this?

MR MAKOLA: I am a normal person, I don't think when a person referred to me as Comrade Chisa it's something that can make me to shoot him for that because I don't think that is the reason that made me to shoot at this man and kill him.

MS MAKHUBELE: So it's your evidence here now that the reason you shot him is because as an IFP person, and you were at an IFP territory, when the deceased and his friends met you they tried to attack you. Is this what you are saying?

MR MAKOLA: That's correct.

MR SIBANYONI: Isn't it that in fact he did call you Comrade Chisa?

MR MAKOLA: Yes, he used that name, but even though he used that name that was not the reason why I shot him. Because when he used that name I did not take out my gun. I only took out my gun when I realised that his friends were drawing their knives and he was trying to reach for his gun in his waist. That is when I took out my gun, because I realised that he was armed with a gun.

MR SIBANYONI: Thank you, Ms Makhubele.

MS MAKHUBELE: Thank you.

Had you ever had a quarrel with him, with Humphrey?

MR MAKOLA: The quarrel that we had I would say it was not a quarrel between myself and him as individuals. The only conflict between myself and him was that the IFP youth and the ANC youth on the 21st of March 1992, if I recall well, we were at the shopping centre on our way to Boipatong or Whiteville, I don't recall correctly, they were on their way to fetch their members at the women's hostel, at Mamasesulu Hostel, that is a women's hostel, they were going to fetch their members at the women's hostel so they were passing by where we were and an argument erupted between us and them, but it was never a serious thing because the police were there. At that instance Humphrey was there and he was the person who was facing me. I was talking to him. That is the quarrel that I had with him before.

MS MAKHUBELE: Would you say his death was part of the on-going violence between your organisation, that is the Self Defence Units under the ANC, and the IFP Youth League?

MR MAKOLA: That is correct.

MS MAKHUBELE: Let us go to the second incident, the death of Siphiwe Mupte and the attempt on Abraham Walter Magama Ndo. Do you recall this incident?

MR MAKOLA: Yes, I do remember, it happened on the 2nd of February 1993.

MS MAKHUBELE: Can you tell us what happened and the circumstances under which the first one died and the other was injured.

MR MAKOLA: On the second of February, it was around half past nine to 10pm at night. I was at Angola Section. I was on my way with my girlfriend, I was accompanying her to her place. As we were on our way we were passing the bar known as Fountain Bottle Store, which is near her place. We stood there for some time, then I said to her "I must go back because it's already at night".

While I was still accompanying her some people appeared from the dark and then when they appeared they said "These are the people that we are looking for". And then after uttering those words I heard gunshots. So I immediately knew that these are the people who were coming to kill me because I knew that I was wanted by the IFP.

There was a person known as KK who was an IFP hitman who wanted to kill me. So when they said "It's him", I heard a gunshot. I had my gun with me, I shot once and they ran away, the two of them. I didn't see that I had indeed shot one of them, but when I was shooting I could hear that I had shot something, but I couldn't see whether I had shot a person or not. I didn't shoot straight because as I was trying to reach for my gun I was throwing my arm. I thought that maybe I have shot the wall.

Then I took my girlfriend to her home and I said to her "Maybe there is something that is going to happen". On my return - because I was not happy about this. I did not know whether I had shot somebody and I didn't know this person.

The following day in the morning I tried to go back to that place to see if there is something that has happened there. On my way I was a little distance from that place, I saw policemen. I could see that they were taking the corpse there and then I returned, I went back.

MS MAKHUBELE: Can you tell us why you were always armed?

MR MAKOLA: The reason why I was always armed is because I was involved in the struggle and when this conflict between the ANC and IFP started in 1990, I became the IFP target and I ended up being on their hit-list. I was a well-known comrade in that township. They knew me as Comrade Vusi. Every time when we were going to attack the hostel I was always in the front because I was at one stage shot at the hostel. So my life was in danger. That is why I was always armed with my gun.

MS MAKHUBELE: Did you know Siphiwe Mapute, the deceased in the second incident? His other name I think is Zakariah. Did you know him, the person who died on the second incident? Zakariah Mapute. Rather let me put it this way, did you know or see who the people were that you shot at in the second incident, that is on the 2nd of February 1993?

MR MAKOLA: I did not see those people.

MS MAKHUBELE: Ultimately you heard who those people were, do you know them?

MR MAKOLA: No, I do not know them at all. I do not know them.

MS MAKHUBELE: Did you receive any information as to whether they belonged to any political organisation?

MR MAKOLA: I cannot say that for certainty, that in which organisation they belonged.

MS MAKHUBELE: The last incident, the death of Benedict Modikwa, did you know him?

MR MAKOLA: Yes, I knew him.

MS MAKHUBELE: How did you know him?

MR MAKOLA: We lived in the same street. He lived in the sixth house from my home. I used to see him while I was still a young boy. We used to play at his home.

MS MAKHUBELE: Can you tell us about his death and your involvement.

MR MAKOLA: On the 7th of March, in 1993, I was given an order from Comrade Makhubele. It was an order that I should go and eliminate this person because he worked in cahoots with the hit-squad and the Internal Stability Unit Police, and Sidwell Mofokeng who was also a councillor at that time. When receiving that order on the 7th - because I was also given a gun, a 9mm Parabellum, I was also given eight bullets in the 9mm. On that day of the 7th, it was on Sunday, I went to Mogako Street at about between seven and eight.

When I arrived there, because I was going to eliminate my target, but when I arrived there the situation there would not allow me to shoot him at that place where I found him because he was in the company of Xapsie. There was also an allegation that he was also working with Xapsie. They were standing outside the yard.

There were people who were sitting next to the electric box and the third house from there, there is a tavern. There were many people at that tavern, so I realised that the situation would not allow me to carry out this target and then other people may retaliate and then I will end up shooting innocent people as well. So I postponed that mission for that day, but I did not go back to Comrade Makhubele to tell him that I did not carry out that mission because of those reasons. What I did, I went to my base where I used to stay, that is at Angola Section.

MS MAKHUBELE: Did you ultimately go back to finish your mission, and when?

MR MAKOLA: I went back on Monday. I arrived at Mogako Street at about - that was on the 8th of March. I arrived at Mogako Street at around half past three because on that day I had my wristwatch as well. The reason why I arrived there at half past three was that Benedict did not have an exact time that he would arrive at his home, sometimes he would arrive at 3 o'clock, sometimes he would arrive at 4 or 6 o'clock. That is why I decided to go there earlier.

When I arrived I went to his next door in the same street, Mogako Street. I was with Thabiso Mohapi, Mike, I do not recall others, but we were not so many ...(intervention)

MS MAKHUBELE: You were waiting for Benedict to arrive home.

MR MAKOLA: I was waiting for Benedict. These other people did not know about my mission, I didn't tell them about my mission.

MS MAKHUBELE: Yes?

MR MAKOLA: When I arrived there I went to his next door at the back of the house. Whilst sitting there, Mohapi and Thabiso and the others would go to Moreme's place to get some peaches and then we'll eat those peaches at that place. Because I was not drinking at that time, I bought myself a cold drink. Thabiso and the others were drinking ...(intervention)

MS MAKHUBELE: Mr Makola, can you please come to the matter. You were waiting for Benedict at his neighbour's place, did he ultimately come home? What did you do to him? Can we just get to the matter and not go about the bush please.

MR MAKOLA: I waited for Benedict. At about twenty five to five in the afternoon he arrived. He was from work. He went inside the house and at that stage we were still sitting at next door and they called Mohapi because they were sending Mohapi at Benedict's place for him to go and buy some beer.

Mohapi went there, he bought some beer and he came back. When he came back and he came to sit with us, I asked him about Remi. Because he didn't know that I was up to something he thought that maybe there is something that Remi is doing. He said to me Remi is with his girlfriend at that home. Then I realised that will be a mistake because is I go there and shoot him he can easily hide with his girlfriend. Whilst sitting there Remi appeared ...(intervention)

MS MAKHUBELE: You keep on saying Remi, Remi. Remi, are you referring to Benedict, the deceased?

MR MAKOLA: Yes, when I say Remi I'm referring to Benedict. That is the name that I knew him by. I only learnt of Benedict's name in court.

MS MAKHUBELE: Okay. So he came out of the house, what did you do?

MR MAKOLA: He went to the gate, he was eating some peaches. While he was still standing there I could see him from where I was sitting, he could also see me. I stood up, then I realised that those people who were sitting with me were not aware what I was going to do. Then I went out of the gate because it was alleged that you would not be able to shoot Remi. Then I told myself, if I try to shoot him and I'm unable to do that, I will see when that happens.

I came near him and then I shot him once and then when I shot him for the second time, he tried to run into the yard and then I started shooting him again, running after him. Then he fell on the stoep and then I went near him. I wanted to shoot him at the back of his head and that is when he tried to grab me. At that time I was only left with one bullet and then I shot him with that bullet on the head. So I don't know whether that bullet stuck in his head. Thereafter I had no bullets and then I ran away.

While I was still running I saw his mother and his mother screamed and then she said to me "Vusi, we will get you because you killed my son". Then I ran away. That's how it happened.

MS MAKHUBELE: Did Makhubele tell you why Benedict had to be killed?

MR MAKOLA: When he was giving me orders he told me that we should kill Benedict because he was the member of the hit-squad and he was also an informer.

MS MAKHUBELE: Did you report back to Makhubele after accomplishing your mission?

MR MAKOLA: Yes, I did report to him.

MS MAKHUBELE: What happened to the firearm that Makhubele gave you?

MR MAKOLA: That day I went to report to him I gave him back that gun, then I told him that I have fulfilled the mission and then I gave him the gun back.

MS MAKHUBELE: Do you know if Benedict belonged to any political organisation?

MR MAKOLA: I cannot say that with certainty. I don't know whether he belonged to a particular organisation.

MS MAKHUBELE: You mentioned that he was working with Sidwell Mofokeng and the Internal Stability Unit. Was there a problem between your organisation and these particular people that you mentioned and the Internal Stability Unit?

MR MAKOLA: Yes, there was a problem, because Sidwell Mofokeng was a councillor at Vosloorus and the Internal Stability Unit were the police who were harassing us and they used to kill comrades in the township, so they did not like the comrades and the members of the ANC.

MS MAKHUBELE: Any particular act that Benedict did against you as comrades?

MR MAKOLA: Personally I never had a grudge with him, he never did anything to me.

MS MAKHUBELE: The organisation?

MR MAKOLA: Referring to the organisation I would say he participated in killing the comrades because he was always in the company of Sidwell, killing the comrades.

MS MAKHUBELE: And particular person you know or remember who was killed by these particular persons, Benedict included?

MR MAKOLA: Yes, there is such a person, that is George Skamora Machel and his mother, on the same day.

MS MAKHUBELE: Did Makhubele give you anything as a reward for having killed Benedict?

MR MAKOLA: No, he did not give me anything and I was not expecting anything from him.

MS MAKHUBELE: The death of the three people that you are applying for amnesty for now, how do you feel about them, even those that you say you never knew them, that is in the second incident of the 2nd of February 1993?

MR MAKOLA: When I committed these offences I did not see myself as doing something wrong because I thought that I was defending the community, I was also defending the leadership of my organisation, but as the time went by I realised that we need to reconcile to be together and forget about the past.

It is very painful to me and I'm hurt by those incidents, because I know that I have killed somebody. I never believe that one day I will kill somebody. I know that even the parents of Benedict Modikwa and others were hurt by what I did. They did not even believe that it's me who did what I did then.

I regret for what I did and I would love to ask for forgiveness from them, not only because I've come here or maybe I'm proud of what I did, I'm not proud of what I did. I am prepared to reveal everything that I know. I know that it's going to be difficult for them to accept because this was very painful to them. I ask for forgiveness from them.

MS MAKHUBELE: Thank you, Makola. Thank you, Mr Chairman, that's the applicant's evidence.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Ma'am. Ms Vilakazi, any questions?

MS VILAKAZI: Yes, I have questions, Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Go ahead.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS VILAKAZI: Mr Makola, when you applied for amnesty did you complete any forms?

MR MAKOLA: That's correct.

MS VILAKAZI: Did you complete them personally or were they completed by somebody else on your behalf?

MR MAKOLA: I was helped by somebody.

MS VILAKAZI: Who was writing?

MR MAKOLA: I was assisted by the prison police in Pretoria.

MS VILAKAZI: After writing what you told him did he read it back to you?

MR MAKOLA: Yes, he did.

MS VILAKAZI: Were you satisfied that he wrote everything that you told him?

MR MAKOLA: Yes, on that day I was satisfied because what he was reading to me was what I told him.

MS VILAKAZI: I want to refer you to your application form, it was page 2 on the bundle. I will ask your legal representative to show it to you. Under C(ii) the information required is the occupations and addresses of the victims. It says -

Is that what you told the policeman to write?

MR MAKOLA: I remember that question. I did not know Ramodikwe's address then, then I told him to contact the Vosloorus Police Station because they were handling the case, obviously they would know the address.

MS VILAKAZI: But how would you not know the address because you have given evidence that you stayed in the same street and you used to play at Benedict's home?

MR MAKOLA: When I say I did not know the address, even today I do not know his address. I cannot say I know his address really.

MS VILAKAZI: Okay, let us focus on your trial. When was your trial?

MR MAKOLA: I was arrested on the 4th of May 1993 and I was sentenced on the 10th of August 1994.

MS VILAKAZI: Did the trial take place in 1994?

MR MAKOLA: It started in 1993 until 1994, on the day when I was sentenced.

MS VILAKAZI: At your trial you denied ever having killed Benedict, why was it so?

MR MAKOLA: I believe that you understand the situation before 1994. The then government was the oppressive government. Even the police of that time, I did not trust those police, even the court itself, so I thought that if I accept what I did, because Remi was waiting with them, it would be easy for them to increase my sentence. I did not want to spend my whole life in prison, that is why I did not want to accept everything or tell everything.

MS VILAKAZI: Are you saying that you lied at your trial?

MR MAKOLA: Yes, I do accept that I did lie.

MS VILAKAZI: But then your trial took place in 1994 when the new government was already in place, so what is your excuse for having lied to the court?

MR MAKOLA: When you talk of the new government in 1994, I won't dispute that, but those people who were in control during the apartheid time were still there, they were still in control, they were still judges. They still had the powers and they could use those powers because they knew that they were using them for their last chance. They could easily send me to prison for life. They could use that last chance.

MS VILAKAZI: So I assume that you wouldn't even want those judges to know that you had anything to do with the ANC, is that correct?

MR MAKOLA: I would not say I did not want them to know that I was linked to ANC, I did not want the judges to know that I have killed and the reasons why I have killed because I did not know the reasons.

MS VILAKAZI: Yes, but you were saying the judges would use any opportunity to send you to prison for a long time, so I'm saying to you that surely you wouldn't even want them to know that you are a member of the ANC. Because if they knew that you were in any way connected with the ANC, that would be another reason why they would send you to prison for a long time.

MR MAKOLA: They did not ask me whether I belonged to any political organisation. My membership with the ANC, I did not hide that in court.

MS VILAKAZI: Okay. In your trial some reference was made to you having been in Tanzania at some stage in your life, is that correct?

MR MAKOLA: That's correct.

MS VILAKAZI: Were you trained in Tanzania?

MR MAKOLA: No.

MS VILAKAZI: So you did not have any military training?

MR MAKOLA: That's correct.

MS VILAKAZI: Okay. In your evidence you referred to the fact that you had information that there were some allegations that the gun would always jam if somebody would try to kill Benedict, did I hear you correctly?

MR MAKOLA: May you please repeat that question again.

MS VILAKAZI: When you gave evidence today you said that there were some allegations that Benedict was a difficult person to shoot, that a gun would jam if one tried to shoot him, did I hear you correctly?

MR MAKOLA: Yes, that's correct.

MS VILAKAZI: So you shot at him because you wanted to prove that it is possible for him to be shot, is that not your case?

MR MAKOLA: Can you please repeat that question.

MS VILAKAZI: I'm saying you shot at him to prove that it is not impossible for him to be shot.

MR MAKOLA: I did not shoot him to prove that he can be shot, I shot him because I received the order that he should be eliminated. I did not have anything to prove.

MS VILAKAZI: You said you got your instructions from Mr Makhubela, is that correct?

MR MAKOLA: That's correct.

MS VILAKAZI: And that Mr Makhubela is now deceased, is that correct?

MR MAKOLA: I haven't heard about that, I don't know about that. He was very old at that time, but I haven't heard about that.

MS VILAKAZI: So are you now saying you didn't have any contact with Mr Makhubela after the incident?

MR MAKOLA: After my arrest, because Mr Makhubela did not have a telephone, it was not easy for us to keep contact. I would only see him in court, but when I went to prison I could not contact him.

MS VILAKAZI: You have given evidence that the deceased, Benedict, was an informer and also an assassin. Let's look at the question of him being an informer. Did you know that for a fact that he was an informer or is it something that you were told?

MR MAKOLA: Yes, I knew that because when George Skamora was killed on the 7th of July 1992, he went to my home and they assaulted my mother and he told my mother that wherever he will come across me he's going to kill me. On June 16th, 1992 he gave information about a comrade who used to stay at his place, that is Veli(?) and he was in the company of the police on that same day.

MS VILAKAZI: And then what about the fact that he was an assassin, did you know for a fact that he was an assassin or did you just hear about that?

MR MAKOLA: I knew that in full because when George was killed they came back the following morning together with Sidwell Mofokeng and a white man known as Wessels and CID Police. And Sidwell Mofokeng came out of that car and said to us they have not finished and they will come back again to finish others who are left. Remi was with them, that is when I realised that he was an informer. I grew up under him, I knew him fully. He was there, I saw him.

MS VILAKAZI: When did that happen?

MR MAKOLA: On the 7th of July 1992.

MS VILAKAZI: So at that time you became sure that Benedict was an assassin, is that what you're saying?

MR MAKOLA: Yes, I became certain on that day because it was well-known that Remi was killing people in the township, but I did not have full evidence that he killed somebody, but on the 7th of June 1992 it was the first time that I saw that it's true that Remi was killing people. Even on the 16th of June 1992, there was full evidence that he was the person who went to fetch Veli at home. I did not have full evidence about that, but this incident of the 7th of June 1992, I had full evidence because I saw him with my eyes.

MS VILAKAZI: So from what you're saying, this Benedict was responsible for the death of quite a number of people, is that correct? From what you are ...(intervention)

MR MAKOLA: May you please repeat the question.

MS VILAKAZI: From what you are saying, this Benedict or Remi, as you call him, was responsible for the death of quite a number of people in your community.

MR MAKOLA: From what I know, the allegations and rumours in the township was that Remi was killing people, but what I know is that on the 7th of July 1992, when George Skamora was killed, Remi was present in that incident. That is the incident that I know that Remi was present.

MS VILAKAZI: So if that is the case why did it take you so long to act? Because you're saying the incident occurred in July 1992 and you only killed him 1993, February, why didn't you eliminate him immediately?

MR MAKOLA: As this happened in 1992, we have rules in the ANC that we have to follow, you don't just do things as you like or wish. I did not expect that one day I will be given an honour to go and kill him. On that day I did not have that in my mind, that one day I will kill a person.

MS VILAKAZI: Is it also the rules of the ANC that you could shoot your target in full view of other people, especially children?

MR MAKOLA: No, that is not the ANC rule that you should kill somebody in full view of everybody, but if the situation allows you to attack your target at that moment, you can go ahead with your mission, but that is not the ANC's rules that you should do it that way.

MS VILAKAZI: So you disregarded the rules of the ANC and decided to shoot him in front of his young kid.

MR MAKOLA: When you say I disregarded the ANC rules, I would say that I respected the ANC rules because when I was given an order to go and fulfil that mission, I did just that and the day that I was instructed to carry out that mission had already passed, so I went further to carry out that mission the following day. I would say there was no-one, I did not shoot him in front of his kids, I did not see any other person, I only saw him.

MS VILAKAZI: Are you denying that his young kid was in the vicinity when you shot him?

MR MAKOLA: I would not dispute and I would not agree with you. What I can say is that I did not see the kid.

MS VILAKAZI: I'm putting it to you that the kid was around.

MR MAKOLA: If you say that, I will accept what you say to me. As the person who was present there, who shot Remi, I did not see the kid because I was only concentrating on my target. I did not see the people in the surroundings. The first time I heard about that was in court.

MS VILAKAZI: In your evidence you said you did not - that Mr Makhubela did not give you any reward for having carried out your mission. Did I hear you correctly?

MR MAKOLA: Yes, he did not reward me and I did not expect him to reward me.

MS VILAKAZI: Were you working at that time?

MR MAKOLA: No.

MS VILAKAZI: Did you have any form of income?

MR MAKOLA: No.

MS VILAKAZI: I'm putting it to you that the information I have from the family is that shortly after the death of Benedict, you were seen going up and down the street in a variety of new clothes, what is your comment on that?

MR MAKOLA: Which street are you referring to Ma'am?

MS VILAKAZI: The street that you and Benedict stayed in.

MR MAKOLA: Yes, that's correct.

MS VILAKAZI: So where did you get the new clothes from?

MR MAKOLA: Are you saying new clothes? May you please explain that to me because I don't understand when you talk about new clothes.

MS VILAKAZI: In my initial question I said that I put it to you that shortly after the death you were seeing going up and down the street in a variety of new clothes, and you said that is true.

MR MAKOLA: I only heard when you say I was going up and down but I did not understand when you say I had new clothes.

MS VILAKAZI: So what was your purpose of going up and down the street?

MR MAKOLA: I was not going up and down, I was just passing by. I wanted to know what had happened, I wanted to know whether he had died or if he was still alive.

MS VILAKAZI: Were you arrested immediately after the incident?

MR MAKOLA: No.

MS VILAKAZI: At the time of Benedict's burial, were you in custody already?

MR MAKOLA: No.

MS VILAKAZI: Do you know that there were difficulties in burying Benedict in Vosloorus?

MR MAKOLA: Yes, I heard about that but I didn't know the nature of the problem.

MS VILAKAZI: So you only knew that there were problems?

MR MAKOLA: That's correct.

MS VILAKAZI: How did you get to know that there were problems?

MR MAKOLA: Like I said, we stayed together in the same street and I had friends in that street, in Mogako Street. The person who used to live close to Remi's place was Mohapi and Mohapi was my friend, we grew up together. He was the person who would inform me about everything. Even when Benedict was in hospital he was the person who was informing me about everything.

MS VILAKAZI: So did you get the information from Mohapi that there were problems with burying Benedict in Vosloorus?

MR MAKOLA: Yes.

MS VILAKAZI: Did you ask him what problems there were?

MR MAKOLA: I did not ask him, he just volunteered that information to me. He said to me they tried to bury him at the local Catholic Church, but the Priest in the church refused to bury him. They went to Lesotho and in Lesotho they encountered problems as well and then he was finally buried at Actonville.

MS VILAKAZI: You referred to Lesotho, are you referring to the Kingdom of Lesotho?

MR MAKOLA: When I refer to Lesotho I refer to the Mountain Kingdom, because he's the person who talked about Lesotho, I'm not exactly sure whether he was referring to the Kingdom of Lesotho or not.

MS VILAKAZI: So you knew what problems there were but you were trying to say that you didn't know about the problems?

MR MAKOLA: When you talk about problems you are not referring to one thing. There are many problems. What can be a problem to me may not necessarily be a problem to them. I can think of a problem which is not a problem to them.

MS VILAKAZI: I'm putting it to you that the family had problems burying the deceased, Benedict, at Vosloorus because the residents threatened to disrupt the proceedings.

MR MAKOLA: I heard about that rumour. I know about that rumour but that they had problems in burying him, I do not have facts about that.

MS VILAKAZI: I'm also putting it to you that you were known to be part of the group of residents who were against the burial of Benedict at the Vosloorus cemetery.

MR MAKOLA: I do not understand when you say I was also part of the group of people who did not want Benedict to be buried at that place because you don't have evidence that I was there. Because I'm telling you that I was not in that group.

MS VILAKAZI: What I'm putting to you comes from my consultation with the family, so what I'm saying to you is what they said to me.

MR MAKOLA: I was not part of that group that was against his burial in Vosloorus.

MS VILAKAZI: I'm putting it to you that Benedict was not involved in politics at all.

MR MAKOLA: Like I have already said, Benedict Modikwa, I did not know in which organisation he belonged. I do not have true facts about that, that is why I cannot say that he belonged to a particular political organisation. The only thing that I knew about Ramodikwe is that he was a killer and he was harassing the community.

MS VILAKAZI: I'm also putting it to you that benefitted financially from the killing of Mr Modikwa.

MR MAKOLA: I dispute that because I never received any reward as I was not expecting any reward. If you have any evidence that will show that I did receive a reward, I would appreciate if you can present that evidence and show me where I have put my signature that indicated I received a reward on a particular day.

MS VILAKAZI: I have no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Ms Vilakazi. Ms Mtanga, have you got any questions?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS MTANGA: Yes, Chairperson.

Mr Makola, in your testimony on the murder of Humphrey Khumalo, you stated that on the 25th of March 1992, some argument erupted between yourself and a group of people amongst whom Humphrey was, can you tell us more about what happened on that day? How did you come to meet them?

MR MAKOLA: I did not say on the 25th of March, I said on the 21st of March. We were at the shopping centre, he was in the company of members of the Youth Brigade. When I refer to the Youth Brigade, I refer to the youth who belonged to the IFP. As they were harassing us, we were standing at the shopping complex. They were going to the hostel, they were going to fetch other members of their organisation at the women's hostel. We were just standing outside the shopping complex, we were waiting for the bus. I don't recall well where we were going, I think we were going to Whiteville, Boipatong or Daveyton, but I cannot recall clearly where we were going to.

MS MTANGA: And how did you come to argue with them? Because in your testimony you said that an argument erupted between you and them.

MR MAKOLA: I would not say myself and him as individuals, but his group - I am including him in that group, and the group that accompanied me. In other words, what I am saying is there was that problem between these two groups because what they did that day it was for the first time that we see the IFP youth marching into the township, it was for the first time that we saw that and most of my fellow comrades were surprised about that. So as they were passing by they hurled some words towards us.

MS MTANGA: This hostel that you said they were coming from, Mamasesulu Hostel, was this a hostel occupied by IFP members?

MR MAKOLA: The people who stayed at that hostel were members of the ANC, members of the IFP. They were all mixed, but there were no men at that hostel and that is why we never thought of attacking that hostel. We did not regard that as a place that we could attack.

MS MTANGA: On the day you killed Humphrey Khumalo, who was you with? You said this took place at Dubazana Street, who were you with at that street?

MR MAKOLA: If I recall well, it was myself, Lloyd, Thabiso and there were another two people, I forgot their names, but we were not more than five.

MS MTANGA: Was Celo amongst you? Celo Japhta Tefo, do you know him?

MR MAKOLA: I cannot really say that he was there because most of the people who were with me that day, we were not using our actual names. They were not calling me Vusi because in most cases I used the name Zakero. Maybe I know him, but I cannot say that I don't know him, but maybe I don't know his real name.

MS MTANGA: You gave evidence here that the fight between you and Humphrey Khumalo started when Khumalo greeted you and addressed you as Comrade Chisa, and according to the statement of Celo Tefo who was with you on that day and also according to your evidence, you took offence to this greeting. Why did you take offence to this kind of greeting?

MR MAKOLA: I would repeat again, this name Comrade Chisa, I don't think that is the reason that made me to produce my gun and shoot and kill somebody. It is not the name that actually hurt me. Most of the people from the IFP used to refer to us as boys who were burning people, so that I did not take that as an offence.

MS MTANGA: But if I recall your evidence here today, you did indicate that you responded by saying that if someone didn't want to greet you they shouldn't greet you. When he had called you Comrade Chisa, your response was that if a person does not want to greet you he should not greet you. Am I wrong?

MR MAKOLA: Yes, that's correct, I said that. I said to him "If you don't want to greet me, please don't greet me at all if you are going to use that name".

MS MTANGA: Mr Makola, isn't that taking offence to the greeting? Would that amount to taking offence to that greeting?

MR MAKOLA: I was not offended by that greeting. That is not the actual reason why I was angry, I was angered by his subsequent words after he had greeted me. That is after I told him not to greet me that way. He said to me "Did you think that we will not meet again, did you think that this is the Basotho section?". So while we were still arguing, his friends produced knives, so I saw him trying to reach for his firearm, that's why I produced my gun as well.

MS MTANGA: Mr Makola, the person I just referred to as Celo Japhta Tefo, gave a statement to the police three days after the incident, this was on the 4th of January 1993, and he said that - I'll read his statement for you. That's paragraph 3 of the statement, from page 10 of our bundle -

What do you say to this?

MR MAKOLA: Those people who were in court were not even present when this incident took place. If I recall well this incident I don't think Celo was there, because I don't even recall the name Celo at all.

MS MTANGA: Mr Makola, what would you say was political about the incident, what was political about it?

MR MAKOLA: I would say this incident is motivated by politics because Humphrey, when he came to me he approached me as a member of the IFP and he talked about old grudges that took place one day between the ANC and IFP. That is when we had a problem with them. And then he said to me I should not think this is the Sotho section. Vosloorus was divided into two sections, that area that belonged to the Zulu was a no-go area.

If you came from the area belonging to the ANC, it was not easy for you to enter that area that belonged to the Zulus and it was also the same on the other side. So we took an advantage that it was the 1st of December on that day and then we thought that many people who were residents of the hostel went home, so we thought that we would not encounter any problems in that section. We went to that section, we were not looking for trouble.

MS MTANGA: What would you say was the - what political objective was achieved by your killing of Humphrey Khumalo?

MR MAKOLA: At that time when I was attacking him I was defending myself as a member of the ANC and as a member of the ANC who was at the wrong place. If I did not act, then my life was in danger. Even the people who were with me, their lives were also in danger. Because I realised that I could act, so I acted against the members of the IFP who were trying to attack members of the ANC.

MS MTANGA: Mr Makola, I put it to you that the death of Humphrey Khumalo occurred as a result of your overreaction to the situation and it resulted from the fact that Humphrey greeted you in the way you didn't like and that was the reason why you killed him, why he ended up being killed by you. What do you say to this?

MR MAKOLA: That is not correct.

MS MTANGA: What else was the reason for killing him?

CHAIRPERSON: Hasn't he dealt with that? Was that not the subject matter of the cross-examination for the past couple of minutes?

MS MTANGA: Alright, Chairperson, I will withdraw that question.

I will move to the murder of Siphiwe Mapute and Walter Ndo. In your evidence you said that you were walking past the Fountain Bottle Store with your girlfriend, is this correct?

MR MAKOLA: That's correct.

MS MTANGA: And then you also stated that this was at about half past nine in the evening.

MR MAKOLA: That's correct. It could between half past nine and 10 o'clock, I'm not quite sure.

MS MTANGA: And some people appeared from the dark, how many people did you see approaching?

MR MAKOLA: Those that I saw were two.

MS MTANGA: In your evidence you say that when these people approached they uttered something, what exactly did they say?

MR MAKOLA: When they appeared they were talking in Zulu and they were saying "These are the people we are looking for". While I was listening to these people and then I heard somebody cocking the gun.

MS MTANGA: Besides yourself and your girlfriend and these two people, were there other people in your vicinity?

MR MAKOLA: No, I did not see other people because after I shot them while they were running away, I looked around to see if somebody has seen me, there was no-one around.

MS MTANGA: Mr Makola, according to the evidence of your girlfriend, Delatana Nomxholiso Nduza, who gave evidence in court, her testimony was to the effect that you had asked these people what was wrong, they never spoke to you, you are the one who spoke to them first and then at that point you took out your weapon and fired shots at them. What do you say to this?

MR MAKOLA: My girlfriend's evidence, I understand that when she gave that statement she was threatened because before I became a suspect she was first arrested and she was interrogated and she refused to mention my name at the police station. She was collected for the second time and she refused again. After my arrest they threatened her and they said to her they are going to arrest her.

She was indeed arrested for two days and they persuaded her to make a statement. What she said in court was not true, because I have already said that I did not trust the police at that time and those were the very same police who took that statement from her. They were trying to match the two cases together so as to make me go to jail.

MS MTANGA: But you had committed both crimes, Mr Makola. My final question to you is, what political objective did you achieve by killing Siphiwe and injuring Walter Ndo? What political objective did you achieve?

MR MAKOLA: On these two incidents of the 1st and the 2nd, I would say I was in a wrong section at the wrong time because that was a no-go area. I was at the place belonging to the Zulus, so I had to defend myself under such circumstances, because if I did not do that my life was in danger because I knew that the people who were living in that area were IFP members and I knew that they were going to kill me. If they were not going to kill me, they were going to harm me and I did not know what they were going to do with my girlfriend. Maybe they were going to kill her or maybe they were going to rape her, I do not know. That is why I decided that I have to do something to defend myself because I was in my enemy's section. That is why I defended myself.

MS MTANGA: Mr Makola, in your evidence you said that you did not see these people, you did not know them and you didn't even know what political organisation they belonged to. And my question still stands, how did this act further the political objectives of the organisation? Because you could not have regarded them as your political enemy, or opposition.

MR MAKOLA: If I wasn't in that situation, that is being a target - I was wanted by the IFP, I was wanted by the police as well, if I wasn't in that situation I don't think that I would carry a gun at all times. And I don't think I would shoot them in that section. Because I was a member of the ANC and I was wanted by the IFP, what I did, because I saw people in that section, my enemy's section from the darkness and I heard somebody cocking the gun and then I thought that they were members of the IFP, so I acted in self-defence by shooting them. I would emphasise that again, that I did not know them.

MS MTANGA: I have no further questions, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Ma'am. Has the Panel got any questions?

MR SIBANYONI: Just one.

When they spoke and said "These are the people", what language were they speaking?

MR MAKOLA: They were speaking in Zulu.

MR SIBANYONI: Thank you, no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Any re-examination, Ms Makhubele?

INTERPRETER: The speaker's mike is not activated.

RE-EXAMINATION BY MS MAKHUBELE: In response to Ms Vilakazi's question you said you were in Tanzania, but you never received any training. What were you doing there?

MR MAKOLA: We were 10 when we went to Tanzania, our intention was to go there and receive training in guerilla warfare, but when we arrived in Tanzania we were told that there was no longer training in guerilla warfare and then we were told by the regular army that is going to be formed by the SADF and other liberation organisation armies who would be integrated, so I decided that I'll come back home so that I could also be ...(indistinct)

MS MAKHUBELE: It has been canvassed again by Ms Vilakazi that you obtained a reward in the form of clothes and then you conceded that you had no means of income. Who was maintaining you on a day-to-day basis?

MR MAKOLA: My parents, my family. They were helping me with food and clothes.

MS MAKHUBELE: I have no further questions, Mr Chairman, thanks.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Ma'am. Yes, Mr Makola, thank you, you are excused.

WITNESS EXCUSED

CHAIRPERSON: Are you presenting any other evidence, Ms Makhubele?

MS MAKHUBELE: That's the applicant's evidence, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Ms Vilakazi, are you presenting any evidence?

MS VILAKAZI: Mr Chairman, I would need to consult, can I just get five minutes, exactly five minutes to consult?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Ms Mtanga, have you got any evidence?

MS MTANGA: I have no evidence to lead, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: ... ask her. Take that first microphone Ma'am, switch it on. Just remain standing and give us your full names.

ALLA MADSIDISO MTJALI: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, you may sit down. Yes, Ms Vilakazi.

EXAMINATION BY MS VILAKAZI: Madsidiso, you have been sitting in here so I'm sure you've heard Mr Makola giving evidence. In his evidence he made reference to one, Sidwell, who the deceased was seen with several times. Do you know this Sidwell?

MS MTJALI: Yes, I do.

MS VILAKAZI: How is he related to Benedict, is there any relationship between himself and Benedict?

MS MTJALI: Yes, there is, Sidwell is Benedict's brother-in-law.

MS VILAKAZI: So you mean he's also your brother-in-law?

MS MTJALI: Yes, he is.

MS VILAKAZI: Is there any specific reason why Benedict would be seen in the company of Sidwell?

MS MTJALI: Yes, I think the reason that they are related, it's brother-in-law.

INTERPRETER: I beg your pardon, Chair, it seems the applicant wants to speak Sotho. She's on the wrong channel actually. Can you hear me, Madsidiso?

CHAIRPERSON: Is it better now? Mrs Mtjali, was Sidwell a councillor?

MS MTJALI: I didn't hear the question clearly.

CHAIRPERSON: Was Sidwell a councillor?

MS MTJALI: Yes, he was a councillor.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Vilakazi.

MS VILAKAZI: In my consultation with you, you indicated the fact that Sidwell owned a business, do you confirm that?

MS MTJALI: That's correct, he had a shop. He was a councillor and he also owned a supermarket.

MS VILAKAZI: You also informed me about an incident that involved the burning of his shop, can you confirm that?

MS MTJALI: That's correct. That was on the 16th of June 1992. Benedict was on his way from his girlfriend and then as he was passing that supermarket, he saw the supermarket burning and he saw those boys who were burning that supermarket.

He went back to Sidwell to inform him that he saw people who were burning his supermarket. Mr Makola has mentioned Veli's name, who used to stay opposite our home. He was one of the people who actually burnt that supermarket. They went to the police and those people were arrested. From that day I think that is why Makola has an impression that Benedict was an informer and an assassin, because he does not have the true facts about what he is saying.

MS VILAKAZI: Was there any criminal prosecution relating to the incident?

MS MTJALI: There were no criminal proceedings because we were threatened and our home was also burnt. We went to see Mr Montsisi, who was a member of SANCO, to come and help us resolve this problem. He did not help us and then we realised that Benedict's life was in danger and then we decided that he should withdraw from that case because the house was already burnt and my mother was no longer staying with us. He did that, he did not go to court, he did not attend the court proceedings. Because Benedict was a witness they did not have the evidence and those people were freed, that is Veli and others.

MS VILAKAZI: Okay. Mr Makola in his evidence also made mention of an incident involving Gomora, do you know anything about that incident?

MS MTJALI: He is lying when he says Benedict was present because Benedict that day was at work.

MS VILAKAZI: In my consultation with you, you also referred to the problems that you had regarding the funeral arrangements for benedict. Can you tell this Committee what happened on the day of the burial.

MS MTJALI: On the day - I would say on Thursday our problem, we had arranged with the undertaker from Vosloorus, that is Mrs Sekoti, she came to us on that day to tell us she is no longer prepared to bury or to keep Benedict at her mortuary because she's been threatened that is she keeps Benedict's corpse there, they would burn her mortuary. She referred us to Benoni in the East Rand, because I was involved in the funeral arrangements. We went to the far East, we talked to those people there, they said they don't have a problem, they can bury him in what Whiteville, but they cannot bury him in Vosloorus. We agreed with them and then we made the arrangements that we are going to bury him in Whiteville.

On Friday, on my work from the far East, we received a call, a telephone call and this person said to us that "We have heard that you are going to bury him tomorrow at 10 o'clock at Whiteville, so we will be there at 6 o'clock in the morning. So we were really hurt by this, we did not know what to do. It was already 5 o'clock in the afternoon on Friday, we went to look for Sidwell, we told him about the problem we have just heard from the ...(intervention)

MS VILAKAZI: Let me cut you short here. You referred to a telephone call that you received.

MS MTJALI: That's correct.

MS VILAKAZI: Who answered the telephone?

MS MTJALI: That's the child, the deceased's child. I took the phone from her because I realised that she did not understand what was said on the phone and then I answered the phone myself.

MS VILAKAZI: The person who was speaking on the phone spoke to you when he said that he has heard that you'll be burying in Whiteville. Did he speak to you?

MS MTJALI: That is correct, he spoke to me.

MS VILAKAZI: Did you recognise the voice of the person?

MS MTJALI: Yes, I did recognise the voice.

MS VILAKAZI: Whose voice was it?

MS MTJALI: It was the voice of Mr Mbofu, who was the member of the ANC in Vosloorus.

MS VILAKAZI: So this Mr Mbofu belonged to the same organisation as Mr Makola, the applicant, is that correctc?

MS MTJALI: I would say it's so, but I would say Mr Makola is just a ...(indistinct) who is coming to be an opportunist here. He is just hiding behind the ANC.

MS VILAKAZI: Okay, let us go to the day of the burial itself. In my consultation with you, you referred to the actions of the applicant, Mr Makola, can you be straight to the point and tell this Committee what did Mr Makola do on the date of the burial?

MS MTJALI: I will just summarise this. On our way to the graves there was a bus that we thought has broken down. We did not have a hearse and we were using a family car. On our way to the graveyard this bus followed us. Fortunately when we arrived there, Sidwell had already organised with the police because they already knew what is going to happen there. When we came back from the graveyard, opposite our house, while people were still sitting there, he shot towards the people, that is the mourners who were sitting there after the funeral. I don't know why he was shooting towards these people.

MS VILAKAZI: Okay. You know the family of Mr Makola?

MS MTJALI: Yes, I know them very well, we live in the same street.

MS VILAKAZI: You know the type of lifestyle that they led.

MS MTJALI: They were just ordinary people. They were not rich or poor people, they were just ordinary people.

MS VILAKAZI: Did you know Mr Makola to be someone who would wear expensive clothes?

MS MTJALI: No, he did not wear expensive clothes, but after the death of Benedict, on the same week he wore leather jackets and after some time he would come back again wearing different clothes again. He was just moving up and down changing clothes. He was just showing us the way he was changing his clothes, that is why we suspected that he was sent to do this and he was rewarded.

MS VILAKAZI: I have no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Have you got any questions Ms Makhubele?

MS MAKHUBELE: Mr Chairman, if I may just approach the applicant.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Ms Makhubele.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS MAKHUBELE: Have you always resided at Vosloorus during that time?

MS MTJALI: That's correct, I've always been a resident of Vosloorus.

MS MAKHUBELE: Do you know what the view of the community were against councillors?

MS MTJALI: Yes, I did know.

MS MAKHUBELE: Was the community happy with the fact that Sidwell is a councillor which was viewed in a bad light at that time?

MS MTJALI: Yes, that's correct. The other thing was that his father was also a policeman so people would use that as an opportunity and say they don't like that person, simply because of his position.

MS MAKHUBELE: Would you say that could have been the reason why his shop was burned?

MS MTJALI: I believe so. I believe his supermarket was burned because he was a councillor.

MS MAKHUBELE: You say that when the applicant refers to Benedict as an informer that's, this stems from the fact that he saw them burning this shop belonging to Sidwell?

MS MTJALI: This supermarket was not far from Sidwell's girlfriend so he was on his way home when he saw these boys who were burning Sidwell's supermarket.

MS MAKHUBELE: My instructions are that applicant was never arrested for burning Sidwell's shop. What do you say?

MS MTJALI: He was not arrested but he said people like Veli were arrested because Benedict was a informer. He says Benedict was an informer and an ...(indistinct). I disagree with him when he says that, but at the same time I agree that he was never arrested for that.

MS MAKHUBELE: Yes, but then if the applicant was not part of the people who were arrested or suspected or who said that is the reason why he is an informer, why are you saying that the applicant is saying he is an informer due to the burning of the shop incident?

MS MTJALI: Can you please repeat that question? I did not understand the question.

MS MAKHUBELE: The suspect, rather the applicant was not part of the people suspected of burning Sidwell's shop nor was he the person who said: "Your brother, the deceased, is an informer due to that incident", so your statement that the applicant is basing his opinion on the burning of the shop incident has no basis.

MR LAX: Isn't it your client's case that he was a liar to the people who burned the shop, that he was a comrade of those people?

MS MAKHUBELE: Yes but then ...(intervention)

MR LAX: Well then, isn't it self-evident flowing from that very fact that he might think that Benedict was an informer, because he informed on his comrades?

MS MAKHUBELE: May I then leave it there and proceed?

What was your brother doing for a living, the deceased?

MS MTJALI: He was employed, he was working for a company in Boksburg, a glass making company.

MS MAKHUBELE: Did you know any members of the Internal Stability Unit yourself?

MS MTJALI No. I did not know them.

MS MAKHUBELE: There's an allegation that your brother was seen in their company, people like Wessels from Internal Stability Unit as well as Sidwell.

MS MTJALI That is not true. That is pure lies.

MS MAKHUBELE: You testify that people were against your brother being buried in Vosloorus. Would you concede that it's, you even confirm that someone, you recognised a voice of someone from ANC, who phoned and threatened your family. Would you then concede that it's not only the applicant who had a problem with your brother, but that that community or the ANC community did?

MS MTJALI: I would not accept that.

MS MAKHUBELE: Why not? In your own words you said this Mpofu, an ANC member phoned and threatened your family.

MS MTJALI: Yes, I said that, but I would not accept that my brother was an informer and that he was hated by people. They only hated him because he was Sidwell's brother-in-law, that is why they made up these allegations that he was an informer. That was because of his relationship with Sidwell because at that time people did not like the councillors.

MS MAKHUBELE: So it is correct that at the time of his death, there were such allegations that he is an informer?

MS MTJALI: Yes, that's correct.

MS MAKHUBELE: I have no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Ma'am. Ms Mtanga, questions?

MS MTANGA: I have no questions Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Has the Panel got any questions?

MR LAX: No questions.

MR SIBANYONI: No questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Ms Vilakazi.

MS VILAKAZI: No re-exam.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MS VILAKAZI: That will be the case for the Modikwa family.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Ma'am.

Ms Mtjali, do you still live in the same place?

MS MTJALI: Vosloorus.

CHAIRPERSON: And at the same, in the same house at the same address as at the time when your brother was killed?

MS MTJALI: I am now married but at the Zulu section so I'm staying at my own place but other members of the family still stay in that house at Mogakwa Street.

CHAIRPERSON: The applicant Mr Makola, does his family still live where they were living at that time?

MS MTJALI: Yes, that's correct, they still live there.

CHAIRPERSON: Has your family got any, have your family had any contact with the Makola family subsequent to this incident?

MS MTJALI: My mother's life is in danger because most of the time my mother will receive threats from the applicant's father. At one stage he referred to my mother as a witch and he also said that he can use a spade to hack her and he will be defended by the ANC.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you saying that there is not a good relationship between these two families?

MS MTJALI: It is not good at all. We have tried to engage the street committee but this old man does not want to understand. He'll always insult my mother. When my mother passes by to the shop he will always say to my mother she should not pass there and he will insult her.

CHAIRPERSON: Now just give me a minute. Mr Makola, is your father here?

MR MAKOLA: That's correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Is he sitting there?

MR MAKOLA: Yes, he is here.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, I hope he's listening. So Mrs Mtjali are you saying that it has not been possible to try and restore a normal relationship between these two families?

MS MTJALI: We have tried. We engaged the street committees but all in vain because Mr Makola Senior doesn't want to co-operate because he thinks his son has done a good thing so he wants to kill us, all of us.

CHAIRPERSON: And Mr Makola's mother, is she still alive?

MS MTJALI: Yes, she is still alive. She is present here.

CHAIRPERSON: And have you or your family tried to speak to her?

MS MTJALI: My mother has tried. Like I said they also involved the street committees. She said to me they have tried to talk to her but it seems she's not prepared to make any peace with them because they will continue with insults on her way to the shops.

CHAIRPERSON: And is your family still desirous of restoring a relationship with the applicant's family?

MS MTJALI: No, we are not prepared.

CHAIRPERSON: Why not?

MS MTJALI: Because we have tried on a number of occasions, so if you continue with this, I think now we would be looking for trouble, so we decided, myself and my mother, that we are no longer going to talk to them.

CHAIRPERSON: But if there is a change of attitude on the part of the Makola family, will your family then be prepared to try and discuss this difference again?

MS MTJALI: That is very difficult. It is very difficult to forgive the people who killed your loved one because they now live in peace and we have children who have lost their father in our family so we don't really want to forgive them.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, yes, no we understand that. We understand that. It's not possible to forget, but it might be possible to try and recover at least normal relationships between people who seem to live in the same vicinity. But we will see what the possibilities are about that. Let me thank you for having come and having given your evidence. You're now excused.

MS MTJALI: I thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Ms Vilakazi, is that the evidence that you wanted to present?

MS VILAKAZI: Yes, that is all, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Ms Makhubele. Have you got any submissions?

MS MAKHUBELE: Yes, Mr Chairman.

MS MAKHUBELE IN ARGUMENT: The Honourable Committee, there's no excuse as to whether, on the one question whether he's a member of a political organisation of not. Yes he is, but the question would be, was he furthering the objectives of the organisation when he killed the three people?

When we look at Vosloorus as we have heard the evidence, the community had been divided. Zulu section where the IFP hostel operated, Sotho section, ANC hostel, there was animosity amongst residents based on tribal and political divide. The youth too. ANC Youth League, IFP Youth League. People couldn't move freely in politically, what I would call politically proclaimed streets. The Youth were against each other simply because they belonged to different political organisations and were at the wrong place at the wrong time. That is the context in which the first incident occurred and people acted not only in what one would call conventional self-defence, but to pre-empt an imminent attack.

When one looks at this in isolation one will be at pains to find a political motive but seen in the light of the dangers in respect of the territories, one will understand the actions of the applicant on the day that the first victim was killed. When we come to the second incident, we are still in darkness as to whether the people killed belonged to any political organisation which would make one to make assumptions as to whether there was a political motive or not.

CHAIRPERSON: Then it's sufficient for the applicant to have had a bona fide belief that that was the case.

MS MAKHUBELE: Yes, because he was at the wrong place at the wrong time, same as what I've already said. Then on the third incident, the violence between residents and hostel dwellers and the alleged conspiracy by police and the involvement of committee members in people who were sent to stabilise the situation, the ISU unit. We have heard even the evidence of the family member that because the councillors were thought to be in conspiracy with the establishment, they were seen in a bad light, which would strengthen the applicant's case, what really there was at the time this perceived, that Benedict was perceived to be an informer, hence we see even during his funeral, the family's funeral arrangements were disrupted. This shows that there are merits to what the applicant has said that because Benedict was thought to be an informer, there was an order to eliminate him. It is on this basis that I would make the submission that really the actions of the applicant, seen in the light of the political climate at Vosloorus on that time, they were politically motivated.

That would be my submission.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you. Ms Vilakazi?

MS VILAKAZI IN ARGUMENT: Thank you Mr Chairman. Firstly I would concede to the fact that the scenery you painted, might give an impression or might warrant the applicant having a bona fide belief that Benedict was an informer but the fact that the applicant was acting in furtherance of the ANC, of the objectives of the African National Congress. That aspect is questionable mainly because of the fact that the applicant himself for instance has distanced himself from the disruptions relating to the funeral arrangements of the deceased Benny, which actions, as Mrs Mtjali has indicated, emanated from the ANC camp.

The applicant has tried to create a picture that he did not know what was taking place, he did not know what problems there existed with regards to the funeral arrangements, so he created the impression that he was not at all involved in that and by that he has distanced himself from the activities of the African National Congress in that regard.

One other aspect which needs to be taken into consideration is the fact that Mr Makola has denied shooting the deceased in front of his child. That matter was proved in court to be correct, that the shooting took place in the presence of his child and Mr Makola has alluded to the fact that it would not be in a spirit of carrying out an ANC operation to kill in front of a child. The excuse that he has tried to come up with, that he had to use that opportunity to kill, should not be accepted because on his own version the day that he shot the deceased was not the first time that he attempted to shoot at him. He went there a day before and he was disturbed and he decided that there were some people and he decided that he's not going to do that. Now the question is, if he could decide to suspend carry out his mandate or the instruction to kill on that first occasion, what prevented him from desisting from carrying out the instruction on the second occasion, because still there were people around, there was a disturbance and particularly for the fact that there was a child. For that reason the action of Mr Makola cannot be ascribed to the manner in which instructions are carried out, as he has alluded to, within the ANC.

In his evidence Mr Makola has indicated that there were some rumours that Benny was difficult to shoot and that if one tried to shoot him, the gun would jam. Besides that, or even knowing that, he still went on to go and shoot him. There can be, the inference can be drawn that he wanted to prove that it is not impossible to kill Benny and that he could do it and to demonstrate that, he pumped all the bullets into his body, even when he had already fallen down, he still continued pumping bullets into his body.

I'll also address the question of Mr Makola being a credible witness. I think Mr Makola has not presented himself as one who should be believed. He has contradicted himself in several aspects. For example, I asked him a question with regard to him being seen wearing no clothes immediately after the incident. Initially he agreed to that and then when a follow-up question was asked, then he denied having agreed that he was seen wearing no clothes. He pretended as if he had not understood the question and he said what he understood of the question was that he was seen going up and down the street. When I asked him why, what was the purpose of him going up and down the street, then he denied ever going up and down the street. Mr Makola, in his application has indicated, has made a statement to the effect that he does not know the address of the deceased, but he gave evidence to the effect that he knew the deceased very well and when he was growing up he used to play at his place. That in itself is a contradiction, more especially because he made the application for amnesty after the trial and during the trial the address of the deceased was mentioned, so he should have known and in fact it can be said that he knew the address, but he wanted to claim that he did not know. So when he completed the application form, Mr Makola was not fully honest.

Coming to the merits of the matter. The question of granting amnesty. The application that Mr Makola has made is because he wants to be granted amnesty and in order to qualify for amnesty he has to satisfy the three requirements of the Act and one of the requirements is that there should have been no personal gain in the matter. From the evidence given, it is clear that Mr Makola benefitted financially or otherwise from the killing or Mr Modikwa. Evidence has been put before this Committee that Mr Makola comes from an average family and before the incident he was not seen to be parading fashionable clothes or expensive clothes but immediately after this shooting incident, he was seen in new clothes and changing those new clothes and going up and down the street to parade those clothes. If Mr Makola did not benefit financially from killing Benedict, how could he afford to buy new clothes and not just one set of clothes, but a number of new clothes, particularly given the fact that he comes from an average family which could not afford such type of clothes and also given the fact that Mr Makola was not employed at that particular time. My submission to the Commission is that no other inference can be drawn from that except for the fact that he had benefitted financially from carrying out the assassination or the killing of Benedict. That will be my submissions, Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Ms Vilakazi. Ms Mtanga, have you got any submissions?

MS MTANGA: Yes, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, let's hear.

MS MTANGA IN ARGUMENT: My submission would be in respect of the death of Humphrey Khumalo, the death of Siphiwe Mapute and the injury of Walter, I'll have to check the surname.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MS MTANGA: It is my submission that Mr Humphrey Khumalo did not die because he posed threat or danger to the applicant but in fact died because he had greeted in the way the applicant did not approve of. The applicant has given evidence before this Panel in which he would like us to believe that the killing of Humphrey Khumalo took place as a result of him being in a wrong place at the wrong time. It is my submission that the source of the fight between Mr Khumalo and the applicant was the fact that he had been greeted in a way he didn't like and it is my submission that the applicant is highly likely to have reacted the same way even if he was in another place, which was not an IFP area. If the Committee looks at the facts surrounding this incident, the applicant was with other people whom I would assume were ANC comrades and they were all coming from Mr Makhubele, who was then the Commander of the applicant. If the Youth that the applicant is referring to were an IFP Youth which posed danger, this danger would have been felt by all the members of his group. In this case it is clear from the court evidence that the fight occurred only between Mr Makola and Mr Khumalo and it was a personal fight on how he was greeted, it had nothing to do with politics and it is my submission that the Committee should see it that way.

I further submit that the applicant's ...(indistinct) and the subsequent killing of Mr Khumalo could not have furthered the political objective of the ANC and therefore the applicant should not be granted amnesty in respect of this offence. The applicant has not shown how this would have furthered the political objectives of the ANC which is the organisation that he belonged to.

Moving to the next incident which is the incident where Siphiwe and Walter were attacked by the applicant, it is my submission that again, looking at the facts, the applicant cannot show how this killing or the injury of Walter could have benefitted his organisation or furthered the political struggle. It is also borne in the evidence of his girlfriend that he is the one who uttered words against these people as opposed to the evidence he's given before us today that these people, the victims had identified him as the person they were looking for or he thought they were saying he's the person they were looking for. The evidence that was led before the court by his own girlfriend was that he uttered words to them and took out a firearm and shot them.

It is my submission that the applicant has not given full disclosure as to why he had shot these two people and even on the version of his application there is no, he has not shown how this killing benefitted his political organisation and therefore I am asking the Committee not to grant amnesty to the applicant in respect of these two incidents. This ends my submission.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Ms Mtanga. Ms Makhubele have you got any reply?

MS MAKHUBELE IN REPLY: I will only respond to Ms Vilakazi's submission, that's on the question of full disclosure.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MS MAKHUBELE: My submission would be, the question that Ms Vilakazi is basing her submission on the question of full disclosure, that of address, this is not a material matter or does not form the criteria as enumerated in section 20 of the Act and as the applicant has already answered under cross-examination, that they may be living in the same street, but he doesn't up to now know the address. Address can mean many things. Postal address, residential address, and this question, my submission is, is not a material thing that would affect him on the question on disclosure. That's all.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Ms Makhubele. Yes well that concludes the evidence and the formal proceedings in this application. The Panel will have to consider all of the evidence and all of the arguments and submissions that were addressed to us very carefully and then come to a decision on the applications. It is not possible to do that immediately and the Panel will endeavour to finalise this matter as soon as circumstances will permit.

We want to express our gratitude to particularly Ms Makhubele and Ms Vilakazi as well as Ms Mtanga and we want to commend you for the way in which you have represented the interests of your clients. We appreciate that in so far as that part of these proceedings are concerned, there is an element of an adversarial approach to the matter and your clients can rest assured that you have done that to the best of your ability.

However, particularly in my view, that's not where these proceedings end, these are not adversarial proceedings in it's nature. The work that we do forms part of the work that has already been done by a bigger Commission. We are not sitting as a court of law, we are not called upon to decide the guilt or the innocence of people who appear before us and who apply for amnesty. There are certain criteria in the law which we must look at. We must consider the application before us strictly on what is said in the law and if the application complies with all of those requirements which are set down in the law, then we have to decide the matter accordingly. If the application complies with the requirements of the law, then the applicant qualifies for amnesty. If the application does not comply with the requirements of the law, then the applicant does not qualify for amnesty. We are not entitled to take into account any other considerations which might be relevant in a particular case and Parliament has had very good reason for doing that, to make it very clear to us how we should be doing our work and as I've indicated earlier, this is part of a larger process that has been done to a great extent already by the Commission and one of the objectives of that process is to try and get away from the conflict that we have experience in this country.

Very unfortunate incidents that have happened, there's been a tragic loss of life, often unnecessarily, but all of those incidents related to that past that we are trying to get away from, that we don't to live in, we want to look forward to the future and this process that this Committee is part of, is looking at the future to improve the future for the people of this country and not to live in the past and not to continue carrying on with conflicts that belong to the past and belongs to a time when there was a lot of disagreement between people, there was a lot of misunderstanding, there was a lot of manipulation of the political situation in this country. We've come through all that. A lot of people in the world say that it is a miracle that in this country we've managed to come to where we are today. We've been in hell, we've been to hell and back and we must be grateful for that, that we have gone that far.

So, in that spirit I must say that I find it quite disconcerting to be told that apparently your clients Ms Makhubele and Ms Vilakazi, seem for some or other reason, possibly understandably so because there are a lot of emotions that go with these matters, but have not been able to work their way through this experience that they've had, this very negative experience that they have had. As I've said, I find that very, very hard and it is most distressing to be told that and to see that senior citizens find it difficult and people who've been living in the immediate vicinity of one another for some time, find it difficult even to look at the possibility of trying to understand and trying to work through the negative experience that they have had and therefore in speaking personally, this is not part of our duty as a Committee and that is why I've tried to sketch to you what we have to do, this is not part of what the law says, but we're not talking about the law, we're talking of something bigger than that.

No matter how this application is decided, no matter whether the applicant gets amnesty or not, in my view, my personal view, I believe that your clients should take steps to at least try to resolve the problems that they have been experiencing over, it seems, quite a long period of time and as I've said once you've done the adversarial side of your duties, it is just a part of your human duty I believe, to prevail on your clients, explain to them that you've done what you are supposed to do strictly speaking, but that that does not, that should not represent really the spirit in which they should be approaching this matter. It's not a win or lose situation, it's not a court of law, we are not going to decide who is guilty or who is innocent, or who had sone what in the broader context. That is not necessary for us to decide upon that. We do our work, they have to live together and I believe that I'm failing in my duty if I don't raise this as an issue that needs attention. So I sincerely hope that you will, both of your will use your good offices and your influence in possibly trying to get your clients to re-think the adversarial situation that they seem to find themselves in.

As I've indicated we will reserve the decision in this matter. We will notify you once it is ready. We will try to do it as quickly as we can and then let you know what the result of the application is.

We have come to the end of the proceedings today. We will now adjourn and we will reconvene here tomorrow morning at 9 o'clock. Yes, I'm reminded that perhaps I should express the Panel's gratitude to all of the people that we have unfortunately detained long beyond the normal sitting hours today. We appreciate your co-operation, the Correctional Services, the South African Police Services, the Interpreters and our staff and the members of the public, we appreciate your patience. As I've tried to indicate at an earlier occasion, we arrange our schedules so that we cause the least inconvenience to those people who must come here. Sometimes it works out, sometimes it does not. Sometimes cases take a bit longer than what we thought and we are forced to go beyond we had planned and unfortunately this time we had to do that, but we do appreciate your assistance and co-operation. It hasn't gone unnoticed. We thank you. We'll now adjourn.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS