Amnesty Hearings — Bloemfontein — 2000-06-12

MR LEBEA: I would not take these goods to Themba Ncapai because we were supposed to meet the night after the day of the operation.  We did this on the 10th of February 1991.  We were supposed to meet a day after committing this act.  I was supposed to meet with Themba Ncapai and tell him how the plan went and where the goods were so that he could get them.

CHAIRPERSON: Amongst all of you, who was arrested first there, the four of you?

MR LEBEA: If I recall well, I do not recall, but I think the person who was first arrested was King.

CHAIRPERSON: Why I'm asking you this is that I've got records before me.  King was arrested the next day, the 11th of February.  Would I be correct?  I know it is not you who was arrested, but it is King, would you recall that he was arrested the next day?  I'm conscious that you were unconscious.

MR LEBEA: Yes, I would agree with that.

CHAIRPERSON: How long after King were you arrested?

MR LEBEA: I don't know, maybe the same day, or a few days afterwards, I do not recall well.

CHAIRPERSON: Where were you arrested, at hospital whilst you were still unconscious, or where were you arrested?

MR LEBEA: I was arrested whilst I was at the hospital.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Mbandazayo, you may proceed.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Am I correct to say that when you were all arrested, the goods were not yet handed over to Ncapai?

MR LEBEA: Yes, you are quite correct.

MR MBANDAZAYO: And did you after you were arrested, meet him again, or did he come to see you or any other person come to see you on his instructions?

MR LEBEA: We never met with him and nobody came to see us at that time, but we managed though to see members of the organisation while the trial was still on.

MR MBANDAZAYO: And you were subsequently convicted and sentenced?

MR LEBEA: That is correct.

MR MBANDAZAYO: When were you released from prison?

MR LEBEA: I was released in 1998.

MR MBANDAZAYO: What are you presently doing?

MR LEBEA: Currently I am studying.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Where are you studying and what are you studying?

MR LEBEA: I'm studying at Vista University, doing a B. Com. Degree.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Now Mr Lebea, what do you say now to the victims when you look back at the incident and take into account that time has passed and things have changed in the country, what do you say to the victims?

MR LEBEA: It is with regret that the incident took place and it happened to them.  It happened to them because of the system, the system that permitted the white man to fatten and a black man starve.  And I want to say again, I want to say to them, the system made them to be a legitimate target and I want to say to them I am very sorry that we attacked them and I want to say to them, I'm asking for forgiveness from them, that is actually what I'm saying, but asking for forgiveness means can they forgive me.  It's not that I regret what I have done, because I was fighting apartheid.  I do not regret what I did because I was fighting apartheid because apartheid was declared a crime against humanity.  To them I want to briefly say, because I believe they are also the victims of the very same apartheid system and I want to say to them, forgive me

MR MBANDAZAYO: Finally, Mr Lebea, why should the Committee grant you amnesty in respect of this incident?

MR LEBEA: I think the Committee could grant me amnesty because everything that we did we did in accordance with the PAC ultimate goal of freeing the dispossessed from colonial bondage and it was specifically aimed at commandeering items which would be material to the cause, while not discounting the possibilities of fatalities or injuries and justification for committing this operation abounded around the fact that as oppressed, exploited and degraded, we had no other road of ...(indistinct) the regime through armed means as espoused and led by our organisation the PAC and the commission of this operation was within the bounds of PAC and APLA programme, revolutionary programme, so it goes without saying that whatever supported the regime both morally and materially and a beneficiary of a criminal and communal apartheid system, what was a legitimate target and I think it should also be noted that in selecting farmers as targets, we were not blind of the fact that most, if not all, farmers were heavily organised, were heavily armed commando units, either as police or army reservists.  I mean this includes the fact that the whole vast tracks of agricultural land where Africans lived as squatters and exploited their morals with vast profit accrued from their labour, ...(indistinct) as colonial apartheid economy which kept the then racist regime in sustenance for ...(indistinct).
	So it is within that context that white farmers were targeted.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Chairperson, that's the evidence at this stage.  Thank you.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MBANDAZAYO

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Mbandazayo.  Mr Kachelhoffer, any cross-examination?

MR KACHELHOFFER: Thank you Mr Chairman.

MR KACHELHOFFER: Mr Lebea, you testified to the effect that you have decided to leave the AK47 in the vehicle, remember that?

MR LEBEA: I recall that.

MR KACHELHOFFER: Now can I assume that you have therefore regarded the target as a so-called soft target?

MR LEBEA: According to me there is no soft target.

MR KACHELHOFFER: Why, ...(intervention)

MR LEBEA: As I have indicated already that they were heavily armed, they were well organised so you cannot regard them as a soft target.

MR KACHELHOFFER: Why have you then decided to leave the AK47 in the vehicle?

MR LEBEA: We decided to leave the AK47 in the vehicle because we were aware of the situation at that place and at that time it was not necessary to use the AK47, what we would have used was the 9mm pistol.

MR KACHELHOFFER: What was the situation according to you?

MR LEBEA: At the time of the attack, the situation was that - in other words it was a cool situation, it was a quiet situation, we saw it was not necessary to use and AK47.  We used a 9mm.  The situation did not scare us that much, but we would not just go there bare handed.  We knew very well that the Government of that time supported the whites and it was a white Government.

CHAIRPERSON: Now let's have the situation about the van Tonders, let's just leave the Government out.  You had planned to attack the van Tonders, what was the situation at the van Tonders?

MR LEBEA: The situation was clear that we would be in a position to attack at that time.

MR KACHELHOFFER: So you have realised that it was a very vulnerable time of the day when you have implemented the attack?

MR LEBEA: According to us, yes, it was quite a vulnerable time.

MR KACHELHOFFER: And you also realised at that time that the victims were of advanced age already, is that right?

MR LEBEA: We were not aware of that.

MR KACHELHOFFER: You have conducted a reconnaissance beforehand, if I understood your testimony correctly.  Didn't you go into this as well?

MR LEBEA: We did not recognise the age issue.  It's true we did the reconnaissance but the age was not that important.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Did you see the victims while ...(indistinct - mike not on)  Did you see the victims while you were doing this reconnaissance?

MR LEBEA: Yes, we saw them.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Were they young people or old people?

MR LEBEA: I would say they were in those ages, but it was not important at that time as to whether they were young or old, the issue was to carry out the orders, not to check who was old.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Ja.  No. I understand your answer then to mean you didn't worry whether they're old or young, you had orders and they could have been in the nineties and you would still have carried out the orders, the age didn't matter to you?

MR LEBEA: Yes, age did not matter.

JUDGE DE JAGER: But didn't you take that into account in considering whether - what arms you should take with you when going into the house?