Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — 1998-02-17

CHAIRPERSON: Well you decided to kill him very quickly without being very certain, except from you say he told you.  You weren't certain of the facts as to how much you were at risk, were you, because you didn't ask him what he'd told them, you just came to a decision in a matter of minutes, didn't you?

JOHN ITHUMALENG DUBE: I was certain as I had already explained.

MR RICHARD: Right, we go back to the following scenario.  We know that on the 12th of October 1987 the deceased is detained, abused in the sense of being assaulted and intimidated by the police, with the request from them that he become an informer.  That incident was not reported by the press, but we know that that did transpire because the deceased, immediately after the incident, went and reported what had happened to him and made statements to, particularly the attorneys forming the liaison between him and the rest of the world.  Did you know about that transaction?

JOHN ITHUMALENG DUBE: I did not know that.  I think I admitted to that fact yesterday.

MR RICHARD: Then on the version that I'm here to put to you, the ceased elects to leave his home in Soweto and goes and stays with people in Johannesburg, and I will tell you that one of the people in Johannesburg that he stayed with was also an underground operative and that Sicelo was fully aware of his activities and that this person also had arms caches in his residence and that nothing happened to him.  Would you able to contradict, comment or rebut what I've just said?

JOHN ITHUMALENG DUBE: I have no answer to that.

MR RICHARD: In other words, you know nothing about what I'm telling you, is that your answer?

JOHN ITHUMALENG DUBE: As I said yesterday, yes.

ADV SANDI: Mr Richard, can you just explain that.  Did? - according to this information you've just put to the witness, did Sicelo know that this person from Johannesburg had weapons?

MR RICHARD: Yes.  That person will be called.

CHAIRPERSON: I think you also indicated earlier, I'm not sure of this, was that person a member of the ANC or Umkhonto?

MR RICHARD: Yes.

DR TSOTSI: Is there any reason why you shouldn't mention the name of the person?

MR RICHARD: I have already, that's Mr Hlowela(?).  I will call him later in the proceedings.
	Now if the deceased had been a police informer, isn't it a reasonable inference that either the people that he was staying with in Johannesburg or members of the cell that he was a member of, on your version, that there would have been some police activity in relation to someone associated and ...(indistinct) him?

JOHN ITHUMALENG DUBE: I'd already said that I know nothing.  Even about the place he used to stay in Johannesburg, I know nothing in relation to that.

MR RICHARD: Well my proposition which I put to you is at this stage isn't it obvious that the deceased was not an informer as suspected by you, and your evidence on which you made that decision was anything but substantial, and that you made a mistake?

JOHN ITHUMALENG DUBE: No, it was not a mistake.

MR RICHARD: Do you still think that Mr Sicelo Dhlomo was a police informer, do you still have that opinion?

JOHN ITHUMALENG DUBE: I said that and I'm reiterating that fact again.

MR RICHARD: I don't know what your answer is.  Do you still think he was an informer?

JOHN ITHUMALENG DUBE: Yes, I'm still saying that.

MR RICHARD: And you are completely confident and believe in your own mind that you made the correct decision at all levels and there was no possibility of error in your decision?

JOHN ITHUMALENG DUBE: As I've explained that under the circumstances at the time there was nothing else for me to have done but what I did.

MR RICHARD: What was Mr Grasskopf's reaction to the report when you made it to him?

JOHN ITHUMALENG DUBE: He said to me he will ...(indistinct), and that's it.

MR RICHARD: I beg your pardon, I did not hear the answer.

JOHN ITHUMALENG DUBE: He said he'll report that issue to the commander, that's it.

MR RICHARD: It is an idea that we will make contact with Mr Grasskopf to ascertain what his comment on this question is.  Are you happy that he will corroborate you in what you've just said?

JOHN ITHUMALENG DUBE: Yes, I'm sure he will corroborate what I've just told you.

MR RICHARD: Chairperson, before I conclude, may I look to Mr Dhlomo to check whether there are any further questions he wants to put?  Chairperson and Honourable Committee I leave the matter now.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR RICHARD

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mapoma?

MR MAPOMA: Thank you, Chairperson.
	Mr Dube, you will agree with me that after Sicelo was killed he was given a hero's funeral, it was a mass funeral, is it not so?

JOHN ITHUMALENG DUBE: That is correct.

MR MAPOMA: And the leaders of the liberation struggle then identified him as a hero and put a blame to the Security Forces for his killing.  You have already confirmed that, is it so?

JOHN ITHUMALENG DUBE: That is correct.

MR MAPOMA: Now, after you gave a report to Mr Grasskopf, did he accept that report from you?

JOHN ITHUMALENG DUBE: I think so because he said he was going to report it to the commander.

MR MAPOMA: No, no, apart from that, did he accept that report that you had made, that which you were supposed to have done, in the circumstances?  Did he accept that you have done a right thing within the meaning of the liberation struggle then?

JOHN ITHUMALENG DUBE: He did not comment on that, he just said that he would report it to the commander.

MR MAPOMA: It was a trend in the liberation struggle those days that when an informer has been identified he be exposed to the public, be it when he was still alive or when he died, do you agree with me?

JOHN ITHUMALENG DUBE: Yes, I do agree.

MR MAPOMA: And in the case of Sicelo the ANC never made a public statement where it disclaimed Sicelo, is that not correct?

JOHN ITHUMALENG DUBE: That is true.

MR MAPOMA: Does it not surprise you?

JOHN ITHUMALENG DUBE: It is surprising.

MR MAPOMA: Thank you, Chairperson, no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MAPOMA

CHAIRPERSON: I don't know if you can comment on it, but I think in fairness I should it to you, the thought that comes to me from what has just been said to you.  If the Security Police knew that he was an informer and that Sicelo was going to visit you with his transmitter and had done so, is it not surprising that they did not seize the opportunity, when this all this publicity was being launched, to explain that this hero was in fact one of their agents who'd been killed by ANC members?  They made no attempt to do that, did they?  - the police.

JOHN ITHUMALENG DUBE: I do not know about it, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: No, you never saw anything in the newspapers about it?

JOHN ITHUMALENG DUBE: No.

CHAIRPERSON: Re-examination?

MR KOOPEDI: Nothing in re-examination.
NO RE-EXAMINATION BY MR KOOPEDI

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MR MAPOMA: Sorry Chairperson, I've just have one issue to ask which I just forgot.  I'm sorry for not having asking it before.
	Mr Dube, when you interrogated Sicelo and when he said he admitted to you, so you say, that he was a police informer, did he tell you who his handler was in the Security Forces?

JOHN ITHUMALENG DUBE: No, he did not.

ADV SANDI: He was not interested, Mr Mapoma, to know that.

MR MAPOMA: Pardon, Sir?

ADV SANDI: He was not interested to know who was his handler.

MR MAPOMA: I'll leave it at that.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MAPOMA
WITNESS EXCUSED

CHAIRPERSON: Right, ...(indistinct).

MR KOOPEDI: Chairperson, I would appreciate some direction here as to whether I could call the second applicant, or will you get the other witnesses which were set to be here and perhaps you wanted to deal with?

CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct)

INTERPRETER: The speaker's microphone is not on.

MR RICHARD: The only witness present here at the moment I believe and who kept his undertaking is Mr Dumakude, but I ...