Amnesty Hearings — Umtata — 2000-02-01

MR NODADA: Over 70, yes.  And he didn't know their names, but they were members of a liberation army and they came here to play a role, what role did they play?  They were in his motor vehicle, they were in his group, they were going to be involved in the coup, what role did they play?  That leaves a lot to be desired.  And it is my submission that when a person makes such an application, at least - although he's not required to give all the details, the Act requires that he must make a full disclosure of all relevant and material facts that will assist the Committee in coming to a decision whether the application should be granted or not.  And I submit that he has failed to do so and it is my submission that in the circumstances I'm of the view that he has not satisfied the requirements of Section 20(1)(b) of the Act, and as such I would not expect his application to be granted in those circumstances.
	Insofar as the other applicants, as I've indicated, it would appear that they were soldiers and apparently they were hand-picked.  I'm not sure about Ntisana, whether he was hand-picked by his brother or it was the choice of Col Duli, I'm not very sure there, but according to the evidence of Mazizi Ntisana he approached them.  And also the evidence of Mzwabantu(?) Ntisana, his brother himself, he was just approached and told that he was wanted by Col Duli, he wanted to see him.  The same applies to Mxutu and Bongweni.  
	And without asking questions, without really wanting to know about what was going to happen, they give the impression that they just got up and went to see Col Duli and when they got there Col Duli told them that he was going to take over and that he had already made contact with his senior officers, they were aware of this and they were ready to assist him, and then they were sent to go to the special forces at Port St Johns just tell them that this is what was going to happen.
	And those members, those applicants were members of the TDF and they were employed full-time, like we have heard from Mxutu that they were arrested on the day they were going to work.  I also feel that really although their case is not, insofar as I'm concerned, as bad as that of Mazizi Ntisana, there is a lot that they have not disclosed to this Committee and all the attempts have been made to extract the information from them and this unfortunately has been in vain.
	I also submit therefore that there is not much that has been presented by these persons, that is the other three applicants, that would make them qualify for the application that they are making.  That is all, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Nodada.  Mr Mapoma, have you got any submissions, save in respect of the clients of Mr Malan?

MR MAPOMA: Chairperson, I just have very few points in respect Mr Mazizi Ntisana's application, as some of the issues Chairperson, have been covered by my learned colleague, Mr Nodada, regarding his application.
	Chairperson, I have got some concerns regarding the requirement of full disclosure as well when it comes to the application of Mr Ntisana.  It will be recalled Chairperson, that Mr Mazizi Ntisana was a member of parliament prior to the overthrowing by Gen Holomisa and in fact he was a businessman in Transkei.  One of the reasons why this government was toppled by Gen Holomisa it's a matter of public record, were accusations of corruption and nepotism.  He was a personal friend of Mr Craig Duli for a number of years.  In fact in paragraph number 4 on page 61 of the bundle he says -
"During 1988 I was taken into custody for a period of three weeks, due to the fact that I dare to question the government of Gen Holomisa."
	This shows that immediately after Holomisa came into power he had his own problems with that government and has never been satisfied with it.  And he goes on to criticise the Holomisa government and he says on page 62 of the bundle -
"I was convinced that the coup d'etat was the only avenue left to get rid of Holomisa and to force him to hand over power and authority back to the Transkei people in order to establish a democratic government."
I leave it there. 
	Chairperson, this I would submit gives an impression that we are dealing with a man who all along, after Holomisa came into power, became convinced that the only solution is to get him off power through a coup d'etat.  Now he meets with Mr Duli after his release from prison, he gets conversation with him to the extent that he is sent to call some soldiers.  Interestingly enough there Chairperson, he pleads that he is ignorant of what the plan is.  And I submit Chairperson, this is highly inconceivable, that at that stage during January, we are dealing with a man who did not know what these soldiers were wanted for by Mr Craig Duli.  And that is important Chairperson, a disclosure to be made because it impacts on his role in the planning of this coup d'etat.  It impacts as well on his role in the actual coup itself.

JUDGE MILLER: Yes, but Ms Dambuza said that he's not applying for the January one, she hasn't got any instructions.  So we can't refuse it if he's not applying for it.

MR MAPOMA: Oh yes, I appreciate that Chairperson, but what I'm saying is that this draws a background, this is in January, the actual coup d'etat took place in November 1990, that is some months after that and still he is not very much involved in this planning and how it's going to be executed and all that.  I've got a feeling Chairperson, I would submit, that he has not been candid enough before the Committee to give as complete a picture as possible of what their plan was in this coup.  It is not enough Chairperson, I would submit, to say that because he was to be involved in Operation Dawn and not Operation Sacrifice as such, that would mean that he did not know at all what Operation Sacrifice would entail.  I'm saying Chairperson, that is not sufficiently conceivable in the circumstances.  Well, the other issues have been dealt with by Mr Nodada.  Thanks, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Mapoma.  Ms Dambuza, have you got anything you want to respond to that arises from the submissions of your colleagues?

MS DAMBUZA IN REPLY: Just on one or two points, Mr Chairperson.  	I would like to bring to the fore the different stages, or the difference between the two instances, that is the planned coup of January 1990 and the actual one that aborted in November.
	Now Mazizi Ntisana says he was instructed by Col Duli to call the soldiers and I would like to refer the Committee to paragraph 6 of his affidavit, on page 65 of the bundle, in which he says, line 3 -
"It was only on the 16th of January 1990 when my said brother and others had been arrested that I realised that Col Duli had planned a coup d'etat for that day."
	Now according to the evidence that is before the Committee that is the stage he became aware, but he was candid enough to say that then after he became aware he willingly aligned himself, continued to plan now the coup that he became aware Col Duli still intended to execute.  And therefore, even though he does not align himself with the coup of the 16th January or 15th January, the planned one, it is my submission that the background that he has given, there are no flaws of significance that can be cause enough for the application not to be granted in his favour.

CHAIRPERSON: Then why would he be hiding ...(indistinct), why would he be still lying at this stage, I mean what - hasn't he served his sentence, hasn't he been punished for all this?  What is the real purpose of this amnesty application, apart from things like clearing records and that sort of stuff?