Amnesty Hearings — Kimberley — 1997-10-28

PROF DE KOKER: ...[inaudible] in the region and he chose to explode the hand grenade in Kimberley.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, it still isn't the same region which he was referring to.

PROF DE KOKER: Quite correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, it might also - whether or not one agrees that there was a feeling of insecurity, it might have depended on where you lived in the Province you know and who you were in the Province.
	Do you still stand by your version that there was feeling of insecurity Major?

LAURENS MBATHA: I remain firm, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

PROF DE KOKER: The Goldstone Commission was at that stage already running for more than one and a half years - the political process was after a very difficult period on track, the peace process was also progressing very well.  In fact, the Regional Office of the National Peace Secretariat was staffed just a month before that and was progressing with the establishment of Peace Committees all over, this was a relatively stable Province and region.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you agree with that?

LAURENS MBATHA: It is not true, Sir.

PROF DE KOKER: On which grounds do you say it was not true?

CHAIRPERSON: I think he mentioned four things, do you want him to repeat them again?  The arms were intercepted, people were intimidated and terrorised - he said those things many times yesterday afternoon.

PROF DE KOKER: They were general incidents referred to but we don't have any dates at this stage, we don't any information that was part of the main evidence that he gave.

CHAIRPERSON: He said these were the events which led to the incident taking place, the dates are not really - are they important?

PROF DE KOKER: The dates as the date of his Codesa remark could be very important because if those things happened after the event, it clearly could not have influenced him before the event.

CHAIRPERSON: I don't understand you.

PROF DE KOKER: According to Major Mbatha, those events motivated him to launch this attack.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

PROF DE KOKER: We do not have the dates or more information about those events to corroborate it.  If, as was proved with his Codesa remark, that happened at a time which was not connected with this incident - for instance happened after the incident, then clearly it could not have been motivating him at that stage and it was something that was drummed up afterwards to serve as a motivation.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you hope to get a concession from him that these things happened after the event - we may have to prepare ourselves to be here the whole afternoon?

PROF DE KOKER: Well, I wish to get more evidence from him regarding the specific events which he then said motivated him because I've just drawn the broader outlines of the process in the Province.  Nationally the political process was on track, in the Province it was also on track.  Major Mbatha rejects that but we have not had any evidence proving or supporting his mere allegations.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, that is his evidence, he can argue that.

PROF DE KOKER: Would you allow me to proceed with these questions or would you then ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: It depends what questions you're going to ask but you must be careful against making presumptuous statements to say that the region, the whole region then was peaceful when somebody tells you that people were intimidated, assaulted and the like.
	It may very well be that you make a very presumptuous statement to say that it was not so, it may be that we have people who were in fact terrorised and intimidated during that period.  And before you make that statement which may amount to being very presumptuous, I think you need to have some solid basis for saying such things.

PROF DE KOKER: I am therefore putting it to Major Mbatha to get his comments on those issues ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Well, his position is that he stands by what he said.

PROF DE KOKER: With no further details being given ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: He has been giving details since yesterday, he enumerated four facts a few minutes ago and you can believe him or not believe him, that is his evidence.  Even if you can repeat it a hundred times, you'll get the same answer.

PROF DE KOKER: If he can give us more details about those we could perhaps corroborate his evidence or disprove it but if Chairperson, you'd like us to leave this - that you take it as bland statements that were made by Major Mbatha and do attach weight to it, then I am prepared to leave the line of cross-examination.

SISI KHAMPEPE: Surely Sir, you can argue that out if you so wish, because I don't think you will get anything out of Major Mbatha.  He has already stated his reasons advanced to you are the only reasons, so you are free to take it up in your legal argument when you present us with that.

PROF DE KOKER: If that is the opinion of the Committee, I'll then proceed with the following issue
	This attack was and could never have been in the interest of the ANC, it could never have been undertaken to further the interests of the ANC.  The ANC at that stage was committed and they gave the leadership in this Province - whom you acknowledge as your seniors, gave their words personally that the march would progress peacefully.  
	Everything was done by the leadership to ensure that it would proceed peacefully.  In fact when Mr John Block ordered the marchers to return home in peace, again reiterating or living by the assurances - acting out the assurances that he gave, at that stage the act was perpetrated, the act was highly embarrassing to the ANC, it could not have ...[intervention]

ADV DE JAGER: Professor, I think it would be difficult to give an answer to the question if it was a question now.
	Didn't you think your act could embarrass the ANC?

LAURENS MBATHA: I believe that if it was not because of that accident that occurred - the embarrassment actually came from there.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, next question?

PROF DE KOKER: The embarrassment therefore - your statement is that there would have been no embarrassment if the hand grenade - the act of violence, was perpetrated inside the building and killed other people - no embarrassment, no breaking of assurances given by the leadership that the march would be peaceful?

LAURENS MBATHA: I think I've said to you the intention was not to kill.  I think if you can phrase it properly - if that thing could have exploded inside that building, I can agree with you with the intention and my aim that I said to you yesterday.

PROF DE KOKER: If the hand grenade exploded inside the building without injuring anyone, would it still have been an act of violence?

LAURENS MBATHA: My message to you - I'm sorry to use the very same word, was to signal to the then Bophuthatswana Government.

PROF DE KOKER: I'm simply asking you, was it an act of violence?

LAURENS MBATHA: An act of violence regarding you perception, I don't regard it as an act of violence at that stage.

PROF DE KOKER: Was it regarded by the leadership of the ANC at that stage, as an act of violence?

LAURENS MBATHA: I'm not here to comment on behalf of the ANC leadership.

PROF DE KOKER: So, you regarded these acts as being perfectly in line with the National Peace Accord because they weren't acts of violence, is my deduction correct?

LAURENS MBATHA: I've referred to a situation of abnormality and if it could have pursued further, I think more than what has just occurred there could have been possible.

PROF DE KOKER: I put it to you that the event as it transpired was an embarrassment to the ANC, is that correct?

SISI KHAMPEPE: I think he's already conceded to that  Professor de Koker, and surely it must be an embarrassment - I mean to have your own people dying at your own hands, it is an embarrassing situation.