Amnesty Hearings — Pretoria — 1997-02-26

ADV DU PLESSIS: If we go through the registers, the police registers of that police station we will find 
your name, probably there, isn't it?

MR MORUDU: I don't know whether they just put me in there or not, I don't know their procedure.

ADV DU PLESSIS: Right, because I put it to you that - because it wasn't put to Warrant Officer van 
Vuuren he couldn't testify about that but I will request the Committee for him to testify about that now, I 
put it to you that Warrant Officer van Vuuren will testify that you were not kept for two months at the Rust 
de Winter police station and that you are lying.

ADV DE JAGER: Could you put to him when he was released and were was he kept?

ADV DU PLESSIS: I am going to, I am just waiting for a reaction.	What do you say about that?

MR MORUDU: I will deny that because I myself was detained 
PRETORIA HEARING	AMNESTY/

ADV DU PLESSIS: 195

S MORUDU: there, I can remember that.

ADV DU PLESSIS: You see, because Warrant Officer van Vuuren will testify that you were detained 
afterwards for, he can't remember for how long, but for a maximum of a week at the Kameeldrift Police 
Station.

MR MORUDU: On that one I can't say that he is correct, but I was at Rust de Winter, because I was 
released in July, which would make it plus minus two months.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Mr du Plessis, where is Kameeldrift, is it in the former KwaNdebele or something?

ADV DU PLESSIS: It is close to Pretoria, Mr Chairman,  I am not just 100% sure, I can find out if you 
just give me - 	Mr Chairman it's on the Moloto Road outside Pretoria, I also know now where it is, it's 
on the way to Roodeplaat Dam.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Isn't it in the - I am not sure - I am just trying to find -

ADV DU PLESSIS: No, it is not Bophuthatswana area.

JUDGE MGOEPE: No, no, is it not in the area of Rust de Winter?
ADV.

ADV DU PLESSIS: No.

UNKNOWN: Mr Currin any re-examination?

MR CURRIN: Thank you.  Just on one point.
You were asked about political organisations that existed at that time and you named political organisations 
that you were aware of, you never named the African National Congress, had you ever heard of that 
organisation, at that stage?

MR MORUDU: Yes.

MR CURRIN: You had heard of it?

MR MORUDU: Yes.
PRETORIA HEARING	AMNESTY/

MR CURRIN: 196

MR CURRIN: Did you not name it as a political organisation for any reason?

MR MORUDU: As he said "parties" and I couldn't distinguish between political parties.

MR CURRIN: Sorry, yes, he spoke about political parties - is that correct?

MR MORUDU: Yes.

MR CURRIN: So you are saying that in your view the ANC was not a political party?

MR MORUDU: Yes.

MR CURRIN: Okay, thank you.

UNKNOWN: Mr Mpshe any questions from you?

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: No questions Mr Chairman.

JUDGE WILSON: We were not told a word by the applicant about him being detained, were we?  I have 
been looking at my notes, the evidence given by Mr van Vuuren he merely said after the assault he became 
an informant, not that we had to keep him locked up for a week?

ADV DU PLESSIS: Yes, Mr Chairman, the evidence was presented in terms of the application on that 
basis, now what I would want to say to the Committee is that I raised this point, I did not deem that 
evidence to be of a crucial nature pertaining to the application.  Obviously if these aspects were put to my 
clients when they testified that Mr Morudu was going to come and testify they would have volunteered to 
have given that evidence. If the Committee should deem that information as important then, then I would 
want to ask that Warrant Officer van Vuuren then be called as a witness so that he can testify about that 
aspect.

JUDGE WILSON: You elected not to lead that evidence. You 
PRETORIA HEARING	AMNESTY/

ADV DU PLESSIS: 197

<UNKNOWN>: are leading your applicants who have to make a full disclosure, you chose not to. I am not asking him to 
come and give evidence now.

ADV DU PLESSIS: Yes, but Mr Chairman it has been disclosed to the Committee now and I will argue 
that point, apart from the fact  that ...(intervention)

JUDGE WILSON: You can argue what you like at the end, I merely asked you, it was not disclosed by 
your witness, was it?

ADV DU PLESSIS: Yes, no it wasn't Mr Chairman.

UNKNOWN: Mr Mpshe?

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Thank you Mr Chairman.

UNKNOWN: Thank you Mr Chairman.  I have been told by my learned colleague that we 
will only commence with the Pepco Three tomorrow and in the circumstances I wish to be excused until 11 
tomorrow morning if that will be in order?

UNKNOWN: Yes you are excused.

UNKNOWN: Thank you Mr Chairman.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Mr Chairman we are on matter no. 1 on the 25th the killing of Zweli Nyanda and another. 
Mr Brian Currin is appearing for the victims, Mr Chairman and I hand over to my learned friend, that is the 
applicants.

ADV DU PLESSIS: Thank you Mr Chairman.  Mr Chairman you will find ...(intervention)

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Mr Chairman it would seem Mr Visser would like to say something first before we 
proceed.

UNKNOWN: Well Mr Chairman not really, I was just wondering whether from a practical point of view, 
you shouldn't be informed when you go onto a new incident, 
PRETORIA HEARING	AMNESTY/

UNKNOWN: 198

<UNKNOWN>: whether there had been Section 19(4) notices in that incident, because in the present case I would submit 
that one can conveniently deal with the 19(4) notice, in this case it was directed to Brigadier Schoon, but I 
am in your hands. I am going to sit and listen to the evidence anyway, but I just thought it might be 
convenient for you to know beforehand what Brigadier Schoon is going to say?

UNKNOWN: Mr Mpshe.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Mr Chairman I don't know how to respond to that one because if 19(4)'s have been served 
and the legal representative is here, it is for him to indicate that we are here in these matters. Brigadier 
Schoon has been served with a 19(4) as well as the other members who are implicated in this matter. I don't 
know whether I should announce who all are being served in a particular matter, because the lawyers do 
come in the morning and they meet the Committee, Mr Chairman.

UNKNOWN: Well now, for present purposes in the Zwele matter...

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: I will have to check my returns of service Mr Chairman then if the Chairman will give me 
time.

UNKNOWN: No, are the parties adequately represented now?

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Parties, Mr Chairperson is that ...(intervention)

UNKNOWN: The interested parties, those implicated or likely to be implicated?

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Yes, Mr Chairperson, Advocate Visser is representing some of those who are implicated in 
this matter Mr Chairman.  If the Chairman could just give me a chance to go through my returns of service, 
then I will tell who is there, but for what I know, Mr Schoon is a client of 
PRETORIA HEARING	AMNESTY/

GAUTENG: 199
attorney Wagenaar and Adv. Visser is here for  Wagenaar and Schoon has been served.

UNKNOWN: Yes.

UNKNOWN: That is correct Mr Chairman, that is correct, I think that's really the point.  May I just say, 
while my learned friend is scrambling his papers, we have prepared a short affidavit, it deals with three 
incidents in which Brig. Schoon is implicated - the first one being the Zweli Nyanda and Keith McFadden 
matter, I wonder whether I couldn't hand up to you Mr Chairman, the affidavit, the original is on top 
thereof and there are copies for the other members of the Committee.

UNKNOWN: Yes, please do hand them in.