Amnesty Hearings — Durban — UNKNOWN

MR NGUBANE: Okay.  And you have spoken of various cover-ups in order to get away out of being prosecuted.  Did you at any stage during your activities interfere in any manner with any of the district surgeons conducting post mortem examinations on the ANC members?

DJ MKHIZE: No, I did not.  Not personally.

MR NGUBANE: The leadership of Inkatha both at a local level and at a national level, according to your knowledge did they interfere in any manner with district surgeon, Dr Ndlandla who was conducting post mortem examinations on ANC people killed at Esikhawini?

DJ MKHIZE: Mr Ngubane, I do not have any knowledge to that effect.  What knowledge and information I have is that Romeo, having been at the CID at the time, there were times when he would go and help the district surgeon to conduct post mortem.  Not in his capacity as a hit squad member; it was normal procedure for detectives to avail himself when the doctor conducted the post mortem so that you could observe as to the process of gathering this information.

MR NGUBANE: Do you know whether Romeo was present when the post mortem examination was conducted on the body of April Daliwe?

DJ MKHIZE: He never indicated that to me.  I do not think he was present.  I would not know.  He would have to answer to that.  But I do not remember him saying he was present.

MR NGUBANE: Well, I have just indicated to you why I am pursuing this line of cross-examination.  I have instructions that when Mrs Daliwe wanted to attend the post mortem examination of her husband, she was denied by Dr Ndlandla access to the examination.  He alleged that the law didn't permit that.  Surely you won't be able to comment on that.

DJ MKHIZE: (No audible answer)

MR NGUBANE: And my further instructions are that Dr Ndlandla later on advised Mrs Daliwe that he had found a bullet lodged in the skull of Mr Daliwe and that bullet had been sent to Pretoria for examination.  But later it transpired that that information was false, because when this body was exhumed later on, the bullet was found lodged in the head of Mr Daliwe.  But do you confirm what you said yesterday, that only one shot was fired at Daliwe?

DJ MKHIZE: Mr Ngubane, first of all I confirm that he was shot with one bullet.  Secondly you will remember I explained this on Tuesday; we had been promised that Brig Mzimela was going to do by all means to cover up so that the investigation should not succeed.  There were other incidents that you may later come across when my co-accused testify, where you will discover that such things are possible.  I am talking here about changing gun barrels, swopping cartridges and things like that.  I did refer to that yesterday, pertaining to J1.  The swopping of cartridges and they would send wrong cartridges to Pretoria, et cetera.  I did refer to that.  So that if there are suspicions to that effect, I would not say no.  I look at those as something that they did.  But I can assure you that only one bullet was used, which killed him.  And wrong bullets would be sent to Pretoria.  Yes, they may have discovered a bullet at the time of the exhumation of his body.  It may as well be that the one that was sent to Pretoria was not the correct one.

MR NGUBANE: Thank you.  Mr Chairman, at this stage I know that procedurally it might not be appropriate, but I have conceded to advance this to the Commission without expecting an urgent ruling on the matter.  I have instructions from Mrs Daliwe to make an application that time permitting, or some time in future Dr Ndlandla should be subpoenaed to appear before the TRC if...

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Ngubane, unless I missed something in the record this is the first time I'm hearing mention of him.  And it would seem that he is being implicated by what you have put; indirectly implicated.  We haven't had direct evidence, but through your submission.  Are you now making an application that he be notified in terms of the Act as being an implicated person?  And that he be subpoenaed to attend?

MR NGUBANE: Those are my instructions Mr Chairman.  Not necessarily during this session, but maybe some time in future.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.  What I'll do is I'll ask for submissions from any of the legal representatives concerning which to make submissions and then as you say we'll make a ruling on it at a later stage.  I think Mr Ngubane if you can also just make reference to the Act before you make a formal application.  The question of whether if a person is implicated, as an implicated person whether he can be subpoenaed.  Because once it's been determined that he is an implicated person and notification is sent to him, then he has the right to come and represent himself and make any submissions and be heard if he wants.  Maybe you'd take a look at the question of whether he can be subpoenaed because he may well have the right to - notwithstanding the fact that he's implicated - to stand back and not make an appearance.

MR NGUBANE: Thank you Mr Chairman, I'll do that.  May I then proceed?  Thank you.  Now let's go to para 56 - I'll be short on that.  The matter of Nafta Nxumalo.  As far as you were concerned, was the BSI involved in furnishing you of Maj Langene with the information regarding Nafta Nxumalo?

DJ MKHIZE: No.  They did not give me information about Mr Nxumalo.  But it is also true that Maj Langene did not reside at Esikhawini.  And he was not working at the firm where Mr Nxumalo was working.  He must have gathered or received the information from elsewhere as to what activities Mr Nxumalo was engaged in, which activities damaged our movement.  But I did not personally receive information from BSI about Mr Nxumalo's activities.  I could not even identify this Mr Nxumalo.

MR NGUBANE: Is Maj Langene the only person from whom you received instructions regarding the killing of Nafta Nxumalo?

DJ MKHIZE: I tried to explain to the Commission yesterday that as a person who was in close contact with the local leadership at Esikhawini, let me just put it this way: if the situation suggested that I knew what was happening and why these people had to be killed, according to the manner in which we functioned I only had to receive instructions and I did not have to know the reasons for carrying the instructions out.
	I only got to know the reasons as a result of my close working relationship with the local leadership.  So I would receive instructions having already received knowledge to the reason for his elimination.  I think that answers your question.

MR NGUBANE: Turning to para 59 of your affidavit, you mention the attack on ANC members at H2 section.  Is that correct?

DJ MKHIZE: Yes, that is correct.

MR NGUBANE: Sorry, I am misquoting that.  Attack on ANC areas.  That's para 59.  Is that correct?

DJ MKHIZE: Yes.

MR NGUBANE: Okay.  Is it correct that on the very same day you had received a ZJ Husky brand new motor vehicle?

DJ MKHIZE: Yes, that is correct.

MR NGUBANE: You were excited about receiving this motor vehicle.  Is that correct?

DJ MKHIZE: Yes.  Because we were going to use it or attain or achieve the objectives of the movement.

MR NGUBANE: Is it not the position that you became so excited with this motor vehicle that you decided just to test it; you know to conduct an operation using this new motor vehicle?  In Zulu what we call "nkangula".

CHAIRPERSON: You're saying just a test run.

DJ MKHIZE: Mr Ngubane, are you talking about test driving the car?

MR NGUBANE: No, no.  To use his motor vehicle you know, out of excitement and shoot the people who you considered as ANC people.