Amnesty Hearings — Thohoyandou — 1999-11-16

MS PATEL: Can you explain to us what, can you draw the link for us, how did you understand that?

NNDWELENI MULAUDZI: They linked when we found that the people who were Whites in the high positions and the Blacks who were next to the Whites who were working in the higher posts used to protect themselves by the muti so that the Whites must not see the evil deeds of these Black people so that they remain as if they are working in order or in a proper way.

MS PATEL: And what has that got to do with apartheid?

NNDWELENI MULAUDZI: It shows us that with apartheid here when the Whites segregate the Blacks by not considering the cases which we used to lodge in the high offices, that's all.

MS PATEL: Sorry, I don't understand.  Can you explain that a bit further?

NNDWELENI MULAUDZI: I've explained that with apartheid how it linked with those things, it linked because Whites who are co-operating with Blacks are the people who again, I mean these Whites, take us who would take grievances to the offices and then the Whites chased us saying that they don't want to hear things from Blacks and then they said go and discuss this in the chief's kraal.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you support apartheid?

NNDWELENI MULAUDZI: No I never supported it.

CHAIRPERSON: Now who was actually in real terms running Venda, who were the bosses of Venda?  The actual bosses.

NNDWELENI MULAUDZI: I think it was Reveira because ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Who was he?

NNDWELENI MULAUDZI: He was working for the Venda community as president.

CHAIRPERSON: Ja but where did he take orders or don't you know?

NNDWELENI MULAUDZI: The people who used to give him orders I don't know.

MS PATEL: Thank you Honourable Chairperson, it's obvious we're not going to take it much further than that.  I have no further questions, thank you.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS PATEL

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Ndou, have you got any questions?

MR NDOU: None thank you Mr Chairperson.

ADV SIGODI: At the trial how many of you were accused of this crime?

NNDWELENI MULAUDZI: The first time we were five and then only two were found guilty.

ADV SIGODI: In other words the others were acquitted of this crime, the other three?

NNDWELENI MULAUDZI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you believe in this alleged power of witches?

NNDWELENI MULAUDZI: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you agree with killing children for the muti?

NNDWELENI MULAUDZI: Yes I agree on that.

CHAIRPERSON: And what happens to your child tomorrow, you will agree?

NNDWELENI MULAUDZI: If it's my child tomorrow, I think if it happened like that something that I will sit down and discuss with the government to find out what the present government is doing if such things are still happening because in the previous apartheid government when we used to launch the complaints in the government we tended to be sjambokked, teargassed and everything.

CHAIRPERSON: I asked you a question, if you believe in it yourself, do you believe it works?

NNDWELENI MULAUDZI: I believe it works.

CHAIRPERSON: Will you resort to such things yourself, you want a job you go to a witch and he or she says you must kill and child and eat whatever, you'll do it?

NNDWELENI MULAUDZI: No, that is what I won't believe in doing in having muti in my pockets.  I don't want muti in my possession because I think that muti will make a person to be a fool or that the person will look like he or she is mad.

CHAIRPERSON: Because I ask this question very seriously because it seems to me that people believe in this and they'll resort to such things when it doesn't affect them themselves but tomorrow when it's their own children what is the position?  And yet those children are innocent but you say you won't resort to that?

NNDWELENI MULAUDZI: You mean that the sangoma must tell me to go and commit ritual to a child or a witch gave me say medicine to go do this and this then I don't agree with that because I think I'll be making pains to other people here in this country.

CHAIRPERSON: Now is it still happening?

NNDWELENI MULAUDZI: Up to now where I'm staying I'm not sure whether it's still happening because it's long that I've been in prison.

CHAIRPERSON: Now there's been Venda was made ungovernable, there was a change of government, there was re-corporation, what is the position then about witches?

NNDWELENI MULAUDZI: Up to now I think because I'm in prison I think when listening to people from outside they are no longer crying like before just like they are being killed like that or so but I think now things have improved.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you.
WITNESS EXCUSED

MR NDOU: Thank you Honourable Chairperson.  I see it's now almost quarter to one, I was going to start with the matter with three applicants but in this one we have prepared affidavits.

CHAIRPERSON: Before we carry on to the next matter have we got any argument on this one?  Before you carry on, let us hear if Mr van Rensburg has any issues to raise?

MR VAN RENSBURG: I have no witnesses to lead.  Would you like me to address you?

CHAIRPERSON: Before then I'd just like to hear from Ms Patel if she - have you got any witnesses Ms Patel?

MS PATEL: No I don't, thank you Honourable Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr van Rensburg, I'd appreciate you arguing first, it may save us time.

UNKNOWN: Thank you Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: I don't think you need argue on the question of the application in respect of assault, that application as far as we are concerned has never been made.

MR VAN RENSBURG: Yes and I immediately also would like to argue that that also goes for the arson of the second applicant.

CHAIRPERSON: Well maybe you need to argue that because I think it can be strongly argued that in the events leading to the murder of one of the accused, his house was attacked and burnt in the same schedule of events and perhaps it can be considered as one event and therefore all crimes that flow from that event may be covered in the application for murder.  I'll tell you why, that when people haven't got a legal background completes such application forms it's not to be expected of them to know what's small or how to deal with different crimes and elements of crimes and therefore perhaps we have a sympathetic attitude towards that kind of thing as opposed to an assault charge where it's a separate incident and where nothing of that incident has been mentioned in the application form we can't even have a generous view like that in that case.

MR VAN RENSBURG: Yes, if I can address you on that specific question then, I think we've also got to take into account that the forms and the annexures thereto was certainly designed to give persons who are not legally trained as much as possible opportunity to come forward and be open in their application and not in order to mislead them there are no difficult questions asked in this form.  If it is stipulated in specifically paragraph 9(a)(i) that the acts, omissions or offences must be written down, I cannot in my wildest dreams imagine that if a person has set alight another person's house whilst he murdered him at the same time would just write down "I assaulted deceased with a stick".

CHAIRPERSON: I think you are quite correct when you're talking about normal circumstances but we've got to take cognisance that we have people who in educational terms are special victims of apartheid.  In fact I think one of them said they couldn't read English.  We are not to know or we cannot know, neither of us, as to what went through the mind of the person recording the instructions onto this and I'm loath to penalise the applicant in respect of what someone else had to write maybe incorrectly.  But I take your point, I think it's a valid criticism.