Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — 1998-10-12

MR VAN DEN BERG: The application is framed on the basis of attempted murder but I think that, and I submit that in the light of the facts which have been disclosed today that there are insufficient facts to grant amnesty of attempted murder.  I submit that there are sufficient facts for conspiracy and it it's necessary then we would move for an amendment from attempted murder to conspiracy to commit murder.

CHAIRPERSON: We'll hear what Advocate Steenkamp has to say about that but are you formally moving for an amendment along those lines?

MR VAN DEN BERG: As it pleases you, Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  Advocate Steenkamp, when you address us would you deal with the latter issue first and just give us your attitude in regard to the Robert Mabaso incident?

UNKNOWN: Mr Chairman, with all respect, I would agree with my learned colleague on the facts as they are as they pertain to this incident it is probably conspiracy to commit murder and probably not attempted murder as it is, although technically speaking that falls within Schedule A offences as well.  I think it's
just a technical difference between the two offences.  I would agree with my learned colleague there. 
	As far as the rest of the application is concerned, Mr Chairman, I really don't have any specific submissions except to say that I was not in a position to establish exactly what the position of the victims were because it was basically impossible.  But as far as the requirements of the Act is concerned, Mr Chairperson, I don't have further submissions and I leave it in the hands of the Committee.  If there is anything else I would ...(indistinct) on that, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Advocate Steenkamp.  Do you have anything to say on the amendment of the application to provide for, in the alternative to a conspiracy to murder of Robert Mabaso?

ADV STEENKAMP: Mr Chairman, I would with all respect agree.  I'm sure it's within the discretion of the Committee as it stands.

ADV GCABASHE: Mr van den Berg, one aspect that just bothers me a little.  The applicant testified that at the time of the attack on Ngcobo, Shandu, Zwane, there was then, he then joined some of his other comrades after the bayonet had been taken off him and there was a Robert Mabaso who was in one of the work stations who was said to have a firearm, if I recall correctly.  He then said to people he doesn't have a firearm and approached Robert Mabaso who, the long and the short of it is, this Robert Mabaso then shot him.
	Now what I am wondering about is 1) is this the same Robert Mabaso who had sought to attack, to deal with at an earlier time, 2) whether or not it's the same Robert Mabaso, did he commit any particular offence on this occasion that he may understand himself to be asking for amnesty for.  I wouldn't like to find that he can now be charged with something that he things he adequately dealt with before us.  If you could just clarify that particular situation for us, what I call the second Robert Mabaso incident.

MR VAN DEN BERG: Certainly.  My instructions are that this is the same Robert Mabaso.  That what occurred at the time was an attempt probably to assault Mr Mabaso but that that was curtailed by the production of a firearm during which a fellow shop steward and Mr Kondile were shot.  But it seems as if the police were on the scene very, very quickly.
	And I'm not sure, I certainly don't understand my instructions to the effect that any offence was in fact committed at the time.  Although of course the definition of assault is so wide that presumably the simple manhandling of Mabaso would qualify.  But my instructions are not to apply for anything in that regard.

ADV GCABASHE: Thank you.  Thank you, Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, thank you gentlemen for your assistance.  We will need to consider the matter and then formulate our decision.  So the decision in the matter is reserved.  Thank you for your assistance, Mr van den Berg.

MR VAN DEN BERG: Thank you, Mr Chairman, may I be excused?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, indeed, you are excused.

MR VAN DEN BERG: I will leave my details with Mr Steenkamp so that in due course the decision can be communicated to us.

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible]

MR VAN DEN BERG: Thank you.
MR VAN DEN BERG EXCUSED

ADV STEENKAMP: Mr Chairman, I don't know if you want to take a two minutes break before I get the next case on the roll?  It will be the case of Mr Manyamala.  I promise it will take about two minutes, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Alright, we'll take a short adjournment to allow you time to reschedule and to get the next case for us, thank you.  We'll adjourn.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS