Amnesty Hearings — Vanderbijlpark — 1999-01-25

MR STRYDOM: Thank you Chairperson, the next applicant is Moses Mthembu and he appears as number 9 on the list.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mthembu, what language are you going to speak?

MANDLA MOSES MTHEMBU: Zulu.

MANDLA MOSES MTHEMBU: (sworn states)

MR STRYDOM: Thank you Chairperson.
	Mr Mthembu, I want to show you your Form 1 application and I want to show you the last page thereof, page 153, is that your signature?

MANDLA MOSES MTHEMBU: That's myself.

MR STRYDOM: I want to show you page 154 and 155, the annexure to your application.  Has this document been explained to you?

MANDLA MOSES MTHEMBU: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: I'll get back to these documents because I first want to refer you to the request for further particulars and your answers to the request.  The question I want to ask you here is has these questions and answers, are they correct as they appear in this document?

MANDLA MOSES MTHEMBU: Would you please repeat?

MR STRYDOM: There's been a request for particulars and certain answers given.  Now you've looked at the answers again, do you stand by the answers you gave?

MANDLA MOSES MTHEMBU: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: And then I want to show you your affidavit on page 162 ending on page 164, is that your signature?

MANDLA MOSES MTHEMBU: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: Now you had another look at this affidavit, you stand by the contents of that affidavit?

MANDLA MOSES MTHEMBU: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: Now the last paragraph or the second last paragraph of page 164 reads as follows
"Although I myself was not involved with the attack I do not agree with the massacre"
Is that correct?

MANDLA MOSES MTHEMBU: That is correct.

MR STRYDOM: You say in the last paragraph
"I was found guilty by the court"

MANDLA MOSES MTHEMBU: That is correct.

MR STRYDOM: "On the basis that I associated myself...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Just a minute, which last paragraph were you referring to?

MR STRYDOM: On page 164.

CHAIRPERSON: Right.

MR STRYDOM: Page 164 Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Right, which last paragraph?

MR STRYDOM: Well the first one I started with was the penultimate paragraph and then I'm referring now to the last paragraph.

CHAIRPERSON: No, just before the last paragraph.  The paragraph that you put to the witness, which one was that?

MR STRYDOM: That was the ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Is that the paragraph which begins with?

MR STRYDOM: "Hoewel ekself."

CHAIRPERSON: "Hoewel ekself nie betrokke was by die aanval nie"

MR STRYDOM: Yes, that's the one I started with.

CHAIRPERSON: And how did you interpret that to mean?

MR STRYDOM: "Although I was not involved myself during the attack" words to that effect, with the attack.

CHAIRPERSON: Right?

MR STRYDOM: "I do not approve of the massacre"

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.  ...[indistinct]

MR STRYDOM: And there's a word missing there but then he states that "I have sympathy with all the family of the people, the deceased and injured people"

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, is there something that should have been before "had" there?

MR STRYDOM: Ja, unfortunately that's deleted.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay yes, I understand.

MR STRYDOM: Do you stand by the contents of that paragraph that's been translated to you now?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes I think he's just said that though.

MR LAX: Chairperson, I don't want to interrupt unnecessarily but I don't believe my learned friend's translation is correct.  It says "Ek het simpatie met al die familie van die orleedenes en beseerders"

MR STRYDOM: Well I translated "I have sympathy with the family of the deceased and injured people."

MR LAX: Yes, no I'm not - I don't have a problem with that, I just don't see where there's the part where he says he doesn't approve.

MR STRYDOM: That appears just a sentence before that.
"Keur ek nie die menseslagting goed nie.

MR LAX: To "keur" something "goed" is to approve of?
Sorry it's my English - my Afrikaans is terrible.

CHAIRPERSON: I had a similar problem, I thought that the first part which ending up just before "keur" you know is the same sentence but I see that "keur ek nie" you know, yes very well.

MR STRYDOM: And I want to refer you now to the last paragraph
"I was found guilty by the court on the basis that I associated myself with the attackers.  I deny that but ask for amnesty on the basis that I was found guilty by the court."
Is that your application?

MANDLA MOSES MTHEMBU: That is correct.

MR STRYDOM: If I can refer you now to the Form 1 and the annexure thereto.  Just before I do that, as far as you are concerned you knew nothing about the attack is that what you say?

MANDLA MOSES MTHEMBU: No.

MR STRYDOM: Just to make it clear did you know anything about the attack or not?

MANDLA MOSES MTHEMBU: No.

MR STRYDOM: Do you know who gave the orders for the attack?

MANDLA MOSES MTHEMBU: No.

MR STRYDOM: Your answer on page 153 in relation to question 11(b) which reads
"An order was given by Bhekinkosi Mkhize and Xongo alias Damara, leaders of the IFP in the Kwamadala Hostel.  Orders were given on the 10th and 17th June 1992."
Will that be correct in the light of what you just told the Committee?

MANDLA MOSES MTHEMBU: That is not correct.

MR STRYDOM: Now the annexure to the Form 1 sets out ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Wait a minute, wait a minute.  He is saying that what the - what's contained in his further particulars is not correct, is that the position?

MR STRYDOM: No Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, you are saying that what's contained in your application is not correct?  That is 11(b) right?

MR STRYDOM: Ja, the version of the applicant is spelt out in detail in his affidavit and it's contrary to what is stated in the application, the original Form 1 application.

CHAIRPERSON: I understand that fully.  What I want him to do is to tell us how come that 11(b) contains incorrect information?  Do you understand the question Mr Mthembu?

MANDLA MOSES MTHEMBU: No.

CHAIRPERSON: In your application form for amnesty you stated in paragraph 11(b) that the order to attack was given by Bhekinkosi Mkhize and Xongo who is also known as Damara and you went on further to say this order was given on the 10th and the 17th June 1992.  Do you understand that?

CHAIRPERSON: In your evidence you say that you did not know about the pending attack and you do not know who gave the order to attack?

MANDLA MOSES MTHEMBU: I was only informed later after I was told by the attackers.

CHAIRPERSON: Now is the position that the information that's contained in paragraph 11(b) based on what you were told by the attackers?

MANDLA MOSES MTHEMBU: Later, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mr Strydom.

MR STRYDOM: Thank you Chairperson.
	The annexure has also been explained to you, that is this document with - spelling out the political objective.  Now in the light of your denial that you partook in the attack, you go along with that political objectives as set out in this document as been explained to you?

MANDLA MOSES MTHEMBU: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Now is the position this, prior to the attack on Boipatong you had no knowledge that Boipatong was going to be attacked?

MANDLA MOSES MTHEMBU: No.

CHAIRPERSON: During the course of the week, that is prior to the attack, you never heard that there was a pending attack against - on Boipatong, although the date when such an attack was due to take place had not yet been determined?

MANDLA MOSES MTHEMBU: I did not hear.

CHAIRPERSON: When was the first time that you heard about the attack on Boipatong?

MANDLA MOSES MTHEMBU: I heard on the 18th June 1992, it was in the morning.

CHAIRPERSON: Were you at the hostel on the evening of 17th June 1992?

MANDLA MOSES MTHEMBU: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you go to the stadium?  You've heard that people were called to the stadium by means of ...[indistinct]

MANDLA MOSES MTHEMBU: I did not.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you stay in your room?

MANDLA MOSES MTHEMBU: Yes.