Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — 1998-11-03

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: No questions Mr Chairman, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mbandazayo, do you have any questions arising?

MR MBANDAZAYO: None Mr Chairperson, I was going to request you to allow me to ask the question you have just asked.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Williams, that concludes your evidence, you may stand down.
WITNESS EXCUSED

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Mr Chairperson, Members of the Committee, in retrospect I think this witness has covered both points that I had put, I don't call the other witness Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Mpshe, does that conclude the leading of evidence in this application?

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: That is correct Mr Chairman thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: I see that it's now 1 o'clock, would you gentlemen be in a position to address the panel after lunch?

MR MBANDAZAYO: Yes Mr Chairperson, I'll be ready.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes thank you, we'll then just take the lunch adjournment and when we resume after lunch it will be to receive submissions from Mr Mbandazayo and Mr Mpshe.  Thank you.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mbandazayo, are you ready to make submissions?

UNKNOWN: Thank you Mr Chairperson.  Mr Chairperson, my submission now briefly as follows, Mr Chairperson.  Mr Chairperson the evidence has been led before the Committee and it's my submission that the evidence led covered all the aspects with regard to the applicant's case unless the Committee would like me to address on any other specific point.
ADV. MOTATA: Mr Mbandazayo, in regard to the question of the loot that the main aim was to assist the task force which was in the Transkei and now you come and say take any other from the street and say I will share equally, would we say that money which was taken was going to be of assistance to the task force in the Transkei?

MR MBANDAZAYO: Thank you Mr Chairperson, through you Mr Chairperson and Honourable Members.  Mr Chairperson, let me be the first one to concede that I've done many applications of PAC and APLA and other matters, it's one unique one.  But of course when we do these matters we always come up with something new.  Mr Chairperson as I indicated, also the applicant indicated that these members, these people who were involved were not members of the PAC.  Though, Mr Chairperson, you asked yourself through your Advocate Motata, you asked specifically how much was expected but it did not come up how much they expected but they ended up getting R7000.  But he indicated that he felt that the share he was going to get was going to be enough but we're not sure what enough means because we don't know how much, how they calculated it and how did they arrive that they expect so much amount and during the sharing of the amount, so he will get so much.  What I'm trying to say Mr Chairperson is that though itself is unique and unusual as I indicated I'm first to concede, definitely the amount which was going to be handed over to APLA, if it was going to be handed over, was going to be negligible, taking into account the amount which was found after the whole mission aborted, almost R900 as the Honourable Mr Chairperson calculated.
	Mr Chairperson, I don't want to elaborate but definitely I'm in a tight corner when it comes to ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: So what about this aspect, if you could just address us, if you take a look at it just objectively, you've got a group of eight people who embark on an expedition to hold up a van conveying monies, right?  Seven of those members are of no political affiliation, one happens to be a ...(inaudible), one could look at that as a gang of eight with no real political motivation because seven of them haven't got any political affiliation.  Now if one of them like the applicant happens to be a PAC, after the event comes the Amnesty Act, the Act 34 of 1995.  Very convenient to say well I was doing this for the party.  If one member happened to be AWB or an MK cadre, he could also come and say well I was doing it for the organisation because objectively, when one looks at it, it's just a gang of eight people.  When the applicant's tried, well from the information we've got, it was never brought up that any political motive at all, it comes for the first time in this application and then that raises the question which I asked him, you know why if it's for the APLA or PAC, why go to somebody in a different organisation at the time, you know, when you can get all the money instead of one eighth?

MR MBANDAZAYO: Mr Chairperson, I don't know whether you're asking me or want me to comment.  Mr Chairperson, looking at it, looking at it the way you put it and the way also myself I see it, definitely one would concede that definitely any other person who looked at it objectively will find it difficult to understand when you take into account the number of people who were almost seven if we accept his evidence as it is, that seven people were not affiliated to any and at the same time what was being done was done on behalf of the organisation.  One if he looks at it objectively definitely Mr Chairperson, one would have to consider that point, it becomes very difficult.
ADV. MOTATA: Because if you take it a step further, that firstly at least assistance of a member of the ANC and we know the policy of the ANC didn't cover that and if there was a request, let's accept there was a request from Mabena, he had ample opportunity to look for his fellow PAC members and say "Hey, as you know our organisation is suffering and we want to train a task team in the Transkei to stabilise the councillors there, that would achieve our objective and Mabena wants that kind of money".  Wouldn't that be looking at it objectively that the first thing he would go to the people who are of your home?

MR MBANDAZAYO: Through you Mr Chairperson.  Mr Chairperson, that's why I said I concede that definitely I tried to put it, I thought that I was covering almost everything when I said that everything has been covered in the evidence.  In a way I was trying to save the Committee, if it was in a court I'd leave it in the hands of the Honourable Members of the Committee.
NO FURTHER ARGUMENT BY MR MBANDAZAYO

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Mbandazayo.  Mr Mpshe?

UNKNOWN: Thank you Mr Chair and Members of the Committee.  Mr Chairman, what I was going to state was what has already been envisaged by Mr Mbandazayo.  I have no submission to make and to leave all to the discretion of the Committee, unless the Committee would like me to highlight any other aspect raised?
NO FURTHER ARGUMENT BY MR MPSHE

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  I take it there's no reply to that?

MR MBANDAZAYO: Nothing, none Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: We could have had this argument before lunch.  Yes thank you, we'll reserve judgment, we'll have to discuss the matter with ourselves and we'll hand down a written judgment at a later stage.   Thank you very much.  Victims?

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Thank you, Mr Chairperson.  The victims are as follows, Mr Chairman.
	The first one is the wife to the policeman who was killed - not policeman, Fidelity Guard person who was killed.  The wife is Mrs Johanna Coetzee of 59 Wessels Street, Meiringspark in Klerksdorp.
	Then Mr Edward van Reeswyk, he's one of the Fidelity Guards who was shot but he is still alive.  Edward van Reeswyk R-e-e-s-w-y-k care of Fidelity Guards, Vanderbijlpark, he is still employed there.  Fidelity Guards, Vanderbijlpark.  This is the gentleman I spoke to this morning.
	And the other one Mr Chairman, unfortunately he was shot there but he has since died not because of the incident but because of some other incident.

CHAIRPERSON: Then his next of kin won't quality then, he died of causes other than you know the injuries inflicted in the operation.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: That is correct, Mr Chairman.  That will be all Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: And that rounds up the work for the day.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay then tomorrow?