Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1998-11-11

ERNEST RAMATALA: I was the part of the game, I was aware that what was going to happen, so I did it purposely that as if there's something wrong.  These people they just stopped.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: And did both Combis stop?

ERNEST RAMATALA: Yes.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: Were there any so-called white members present?

ERNEST RAMATALA: I said that in that area I didn't see any white people.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: No one in the Combis?

ERNEST RAMATALA: No, I didn't see, not even a single one in the Combi.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: Mr McCarter certainly not there?

ERNEST RAMATALA: I cannot deny maybe he was in the Combi sitting but I didn't see him.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: Is it possible then that in the Combi there could have been other members as well, other white members as well?

ERNEST RAMATALA: That can be possible.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: Alright, you then say it was Mhieza and Lembedi as I understand your statement who took over Bhila?

ERNEST RAMATALA: Yes.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: It was not perhaps McCarter and Lembedi?

ERNEST RAMATALA: No, no.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: I'm going to suggest to you so that as far as this incident is concerned that you are wrong as far as Mr Mhieza's role or the role that you attribute to him is concerned, he was not there, it was Lembedi what pointed out the house, it was Lembedi who with McCarter took hold of Bhila.

ERNEST RAMATALA: And Mr McCarter in my car, in that Combi?

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: No, at the end when your vehicle was pulled off so to speak, I say so in inverted commas if one can do so, it was McCarter and Lembedi?

ERNEST RAMATALA: No.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: My instructions from Mhieza is in any event that he was not there, he did not take part in this?

ERNEST RAMATALA: He was there.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: At the best for you, you're mistaken about it?

ERNEST RAMATALA: No, no, no, he was there.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: These other gentlemen that were with you, Mr Letsatse and the other gentlemen in your vehicle, Shakes - what was his name again would you remind me?

ERNEST RAMATALA: His surname is Malaleka.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: Malaleka.  Do you know whether they ever made statements to the police, to Mr Holmes?

ERNEST RAMATALA: I don't know.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: They were not there with you when you made your statement?

ERNEST RAMATALA: No, I was making a statement alone.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: Have you ever discussed this matter with them after the event?

ERNEST RAMATALA: Nothing.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: Do you know if these two gentlemen are still around?

ERNEST RAMATALA: No I don't know.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: You've not had any contact?

ERNEST RAMATALA: No.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: Dealing with the S & T forms, I've just had a look at that, are you saying that there were S & T forms also made out for this person Shakes Malaleka or not?

ERNEST RAMATALA: No.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: Is it your version that he was at one stage incarcerated and then he came out and took part in this operation, is that your evidence?

ERNEST RAMATALA: By then he was not a policeman by then, when he came back from jail so it was impossible to clear him for somebody who is not the part of the police.

MR VAN SCHALKWYK: Alright.  Thank you Mr Chairman.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VAN SCHALKWYK

MR MALAN: May I just ask, is it not possible that a claim form was put in on behalf of Mr Mhieza in order to collect the money to hand to Shakes Malaleka, is that not a possibility?

ERNEST RAMATALA: It was the money that has been used in the operation like this one, maybe to give the people money to go to the shebeen, you see, to do anything in the line of the duty, you understand?  So that money maybe he was getting the S & T from that one.

MR MALAN: So you're basically saying this relates only to S & T, it wouldn't - the claim forms wouldn't have involved bonuses?

ERNEST RAMATALA: No, no, no, no.

MR MALAN: Thank you.

MR HUGO: Thank you Mr Chairman.
	Mr Ramatala you'll just have to bear with me, your evidence in chief you testified at a rapid pace so I might have to ask you some questions just to clarify as to what you said.  Can I just go first of all to Exhibit E, that is the affidavit that was procured by Captain Holmes, have you got it in front of you?  You have?

ERNEST RAMATALA: Yes.

MR HUGO: Right at the last page at the bottom it says there it was signed on the 17th July 1996 at Ladybrand.  Were you living in Ladybrand at the time?

ERNEST RAMATALA: Exactly.

MR HUGO: And I take it you're a Sotho speaking man, is that correct?

ERNEST RAMATALA: Exactly.

MR HUGO: Then will you just go back to the first page of this affidavit?  There it says
"I Tomelo Ernest Ramatala make this statement in Sotho under oath."

ERNEST RAMATALA: Can you repeat it in English?

MR HUGO: Well it says there I Tomelo Ernest Ramatala declares in Sotho under oath"
that's the translation of the Afrikaans portion, do you see that?

ERNEST RAMATALA: Oh yes, but I was speaking English you know, I don't know what had happened but I could say that this is a Sotho speaking person.

MR HUGO: No, but it's very clear from this document that you were speaking, ostensibly speaking Sotho at that time?

ERNEST RAMATALA: No.

MR HUGO: So what were you speaking when you made this affidavit?

ERNEST RAMATALA: I was speaking English.

MR HUGO: And were there any interpreters present when you made this affidavit?

ERNEST RAMATALA: No.

MR HUGO: And were you happy with the contents of this affidavit before you signed it?

ERNEST RAMATALA: Man the atmosphere was so conducive so I couldn't have any doubt about ...[indistinct]

MR HUGO: No, but that's not with all due respect a proper answer to the question.  Let me ask you first, did you go through the affidavit before you signed it?

MR HUGO: After writing this thing he explained in English I've said this and this and this and this, it's formally what we have been speaking about.

MR HUGO: Yes Mr Ramatala, but you're an experienced policeman, you actually joined the security police in 1981 so you know full well what the affidavits are all about.  Were you happy, as an experienced policeman that the contents of this affidavit were correct and that you were happy with it?

ERNEST RAMATALA: Exactly.

MR HUGO: Now can you just tell us a little bit about your background?  How did it come about that you ended up at Vlakplaas?

ERNEST RAMATALA: I'm very sorry I cannot discuss that here.
It's not relevant to this case.

MR HUGO: Well Mr Ramatala, it is unfortunately relevant and I'm going to point out to you why it's relevant, so won't you just answer the question?

ERNEST RAMATALA: I said I would never answer that question because it's not relevant to this one.

MR HUGO: Well Mr Ramatala, let me ask you this.  Were you involved as an ANC member in student activities in Lesotho?

ERNEST RAMATALA: Nothing, I hear when Mr McCarter made that mistake yesterday.

MR HUGO: So are you saying that this proposition was wrong in the sense that you were never involved in student activities in Lesotho, as an ANC member?

ERNEST RAMATALA: No.

MR HUGO: Now can you just then tell us why do you think that Mr McCarter chose you to approach Mr Bhila?

ERNEST RAMATALA: I want to give a full answer there.

MR HUGO: Yes?

ERNEST RAMATALA: Two days before that we had a quarrel with Mr McCarter concerning Letsatse.  Mr McCarter said that ...[intervention]

MR HUGO: Sorry Mr Ramatala, may I just ask you to ...[intervention]

ERNEST RAMATALA: I'm trying to explain.

MR HUGO: May I just ask you to speak a little it slower, I find it difficult to follow you.