Salmon Johannes Gerhardus du Preez ("du Preez") and Lawrence Gerald Wasserman ("Wasserman") applied for amnesty in respect of:

Bernadine Nkosiyezwe Mwelase ("Mwelase") applied for amnesty in respect of 1 and 2 above.

Du Preez testified that at the time of the incident, i.e., June 1988, he was an officer and member of the South African Police's ("SAP") Security Branch ("SB") in Durban. He received a telephone call from the then Colonel ARC Taylor ("Taylor") who at that stage was his commander requesting him and Wasserman to meet Taylor at an abandoned shooting range at Winkelspruit, just south of Durban. This venue has featured in other applications and was used regularly by members of the SB as a base.

Du Preez and Wasserman then went to the place and met Taylor and others there. Taylor informed them that a person by the name of Blessing Ninela ("Ninela") who was a trained ANC operative, and who was apparently responsible for previous explosions in the Durban area, had been abducted by other members of his unit and some askaris. Ninela was being held at the shooting range. Taylor explained that Ninela had been involved in the supply of the explosives, including limpet mines, to two people. One of these limpet mines had exploded prematurely killing one of them and seriously injuring the other. The survivor had provided information that led to the "arrest" of Ninela.

Taylor further informed them that in his opinion Ninela would not be willing to co-operate and become an askari, that there was insufficient evidence to secure a prosecution and that if they released him he would carry on with his activities. In the light of this, Taylor ordered Du Preez and Wasserman to execute Ninela and to blow up the body so as to make it look like the deceased had blown himself up while trying to plant the explosive.

Both Du Preez and Wasserman were Junior in rank to Taylor and testified that they had no reason to doubt Taylor or to question his order.

Du Preez and Wasserman then drove with Ninela to Bulwer and stopped at a place close to the railway line. They took Ninela from the vehicle and walked with him to next to the railway line. Wasserman shot Ninela in the head with his 9mm service pistol and he died instantly. They placed the body ...

next to the railway line and du Preez then placed Ninela's head and hands on the limpet mine and activated the limpet mine. Du Preez and Wasserman moved away from the area but waited until they heard the explosion. They then returned to Durban.

Wassserman testified in substantially the same terms as the evidence of Du Preez and confirmed such evidence insofar as he was concerned.

They both indicated that the purpose of blowing up the body in the manner described was to hide Ninela's identity, thereby covering their tracks. They had also hoped to create the impression that Ninela had gone into exile in Swaziland.

Mwelase testified that he had been a trained member of MK and that he had been arrested in January 1987, soon after his return to South Africa. After being held in custody and allegedly being tortured, he agreed to become an askari. He was based at Vlakpaas under Col De Kock. He had come to Durban as part of operations to identify and arrest other MK and APLA guerrillas.

They were told about the explosion and Ninela's involvement. At that stage he did not know Ninela's actual identity. After establishing where Ninela could be found a plan was hatched which entailed Mwelase and others pretending to be fellow MK cadres who would help Ninela to leave the country because of the explosion. They made contact with Ninela and won his confidence. Eventually they and Ninela were "arrested" by other policemen and Ninela was taken to the abandoned shooting range.

When he enquired about the person they had helped abduct he was told that he had eventually ended up in Swaziland. Mwelase had no idea the man had been executed. He only became aware of the person's identity long after the event when the TRC investigators told him this.

Mrs Gretina Ninela, the mother of the deceased, testified as to her son's background and activities. She described his employment history, detention for trade union activities and what she knew of his disappearance. Apart from indicating her distrust of the Applicants' evidence she could not take the evidence any further. She confirmed that she had heard an explosion one night and that some time later that night a young man came to her house in a severely injured condition. This young man was taken to hospital the next day and soon after that the people came looking for her son and he was never seen again.

Mr Sebelo Ngobese testified as to the deceased's union activities and his own involvement at the Inanda house, which led to the detention of Ninela in terms of the Internal Security Act in January 1987. He indicated that Ninela was part of his cell and appeared to have little or no knowledge of military activities.

Humphrey Senzo Bhengu then testified. He confirmed that he and his late brother had received a limpet mine and training in its activation from Ninela. They needed the mine to launch a pre-emptive attack on an IFP dominated area from which attacks had been launched on the area they resided in at the time. He confirmed that he and his late brother had gone to place the mine that had detonated prematurely killing his brother and severely injuring him. He also confirmed that he gave the information that led to Ninela's abduction.

On a careful analysis of all the evidence, we are satisfied that there are no material differences between these various testimonies. In particular the Applicants' versions and those of the witnesses called on behalf of the objectors tend to corroborate each other. There are some differences between the evidence of the Applicants but no more than would be usual bearing in mind that this instance occurred twelve years before the hearing. There were also differences between Taylor's version as set out in his written application and that of the Applicants. However, Taylor had died in the interim and we only have the Applicants' evidence before us. Accordingly we are satisfied that the Applicants have made full disclosure of all relevant facts.

It remains to be decided whether the Applicants meet the requirements of Section 20(1) of Act 34 of 1995 as to whether "the act, omission or offence to which the application relates is an act associated with a political objective committed in the course of the conflicts of the past in accordance with the provisions of sub-sections (2) and (3)."

The Committee is satisfied that the offences were committed in the course of the conflicts of the past and that all the Applicants fall within the provisions of Section 20(2).

The Committee, after considering the guidelines set out in Section 20(3) is further satisfied that the offences committed were associated with a political objective.

In the result, amnesty is GRANTED to:

The Committee is of the opinion that the relatives and dependants of Blessing Ninela are victims and they are referred to the Committee on Reparation and Rehabilitation for consideration in terms of Section 22 of the Act 34 of 1995.

This decision has been written some time after the hearing of the applications and after the death of the late Mr Justice Mall. The Panel confirms that prior to his death, Judge Mall, Adv Bosman and Mr Lax discussed the applications and that the Panel members were unanimous that the Applicants should be granted amnesty on the basis set out above.

SIGNED AT CAPE TOWN ON THIS 9TH DAY OF MARCH 2001

ADV F BOSMAN

MR I LAX