Special Hearings — Mandela United Football Club Hearings — UNKNOWN

DR BORAINE: Thank you, no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  Dumisa?

MR NTSEBEZA: Thank you Chairman.  I guess I should have a sense of what it should feel like to be falsely implicated in atrocities and then the consequently I use that as my point of departure to assess all the evidence to date.
 And I think Dr Boraine has painted what I would have put to you as the best case scenario.  That your perception is that you are a victim of a huge plot by the government security forces because on their own evidence, they came here and they admitted having infiltrated informers into your household, that they organised a huge campaign to discredit you and your organisation and possibly your husband as he then was.
 But in the midst of all this (indistinct) web of deceit, treachery and betrayal you are possibly all by yourself, harassed by the State machinery and not having any benefit of political support from structures that were in existence at that time and you would like us to understand that to be the necessary backdrop against which all these things were happening, that if there is any error it was an error of judgement on your part in not having been able to realise the type of people who were around you, and that the tragedies that followed were consequence thereof.
 That is where I want to depart from because for me it is the best case scenario.  Of course there is a worse case scenario and I think my colleagues have endeavoured to say the worse case scenario where we say why do all these people say all of these things, and you have indicated that you are going to address that in your reply to Dr Mgojo and therefore to all of us.
 I am just worried about one aspect and that is the death of Stompie.  We have two versions.  I want to tell you now that my impressions which are prima facie impressions are that when you look at the evidence of Katiza Cebekhulu, when it stands alone, it suffers from a number of deficiencies.  I wouldn't go so far as to call it as lunatic statements, but then you hold that view.
 But just on the quality level, one is able to say it has certain deficiencies.  He is the only witness who claims to have been an eyewitness to the stabbing of Stompie, as he puts it.  There is of course the evidence of Jerry Richardson.
 But Katiza Cebekhulu's evidence stands alongside the evidence of John Morgan.   And his evidence seems to suggest that there was a time when he was ordered to beat this dog and go and dispose of it and of course he says the dog was Stompie and where he saw the dog to be laying, he seems to suggest that it was bleeding from the neck.
 There is then the Pathologist's evidence which seems to say his findings are inconsistent with the slaughtering of a sheep, which would then lead me where I have to conclude that there is a consistency between what Cebekhulu says and Morgan says and the suggestion by the Pathologist.
 Now that is an impression that I want to take into account.  I also take into account Richardson's evidence.  Now, I know that your lawyer will address, because sometimes this is a matter of law, but if you were as a person who has heard all of these things, were to endeavour to persuade me, what would you say in order that I should accept Richardson's account of how Stompie died and that I should reject what Cebekhulu says, what John Morgan says and the inference I can draw from the Pathologist's report?

MRS MADIKIZELA-MANDELA: I am not quite sure whether you want me to comment sir, about the nature of the death.  I am sorry I am not sure of the exact question.

MR NTSEBEZA: Yes, I think what I would like you to say is to give me your own sense of if I said to you look, I want to believe you that you didn't do this, but I am confronted by these three aspects.  I am confronted by Cebekhulu's evidence, by Morgan's evidence and by the Pathologist's evidence, what can you say to me in order that I should reject that evidence and accept the fact that you say you didn't do it and the fact that Richardson says he did it?

MRS MADIKIZELA-MANDELA: I honestly would imagine that if Richardson confesses to that murder, I wouldn't understand why he would confess to that if he did not do it.  I personally believe that he committed that heinous crime and I personally believe the circumstances which led to that child's death as told by Richardson, are true.

MR NTSEBEZA: One last question.  In the  Section 29 hearing, on page 68 thereof, you indicated that you established after the so-called Stompie affair, that the media had amongst its fraternity, reporters who were working for the system at the time.
 And you indicated that your subsequent information throughout the years had been that the first reporters who broke the so-called story, the Stompie affair, and you mentioned Thandi Makubule and Thamin Qwanash, that they had been part of the informers who were planted in the media.  Now I wasn't here but I believe that you mentioned also Norma Venda in that context.  I just want to confirm whether there was information that identified those persons, Thandi Makubule, Thamin Qwanash and Norma Venda, (indistinct), as informers who were planted in the media?

MRS MADIKIZELA-MANDELA: Yes, sir.  I had no direct evidence.  I had no access to STRATCOM information, that was just information at the time, in the same fashion they spread information about people like myself.

MR NTSEBEZA: Would it be that these media spies or media informers, are the people that in your view, Vic McPherson referred to when he testified here the other day, that he had in his list as manager of STRATCOM certain reporters who he called media contacts?

MRS MADIKIZELA-MANDELA: Sir, I really wouldn't confirm that their names are on that list.  I was merely giving information of the time, at the time.

MR NTSEBEZA: Thank you.  Just for the record, to the extent that Vic McPherson sent a list to us which was listing the names of what he called media contacts, friendly journalists, I just want to place on the record that neither Thandi Makubule nor Thamin Qwanash, nor Norma Venda (indistinct) are part of that list.  Thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  Hlengiwe?

MS MKHIZE: Thank you Chairperson. I will, Mrs Madikizela-Mandela, I will repeat a question which I raised during the in camera Section 29 inquiries as to, it is an important question in the sense that when we evaluate the proceedings of these days, we are likely to go back to it.
 It is important for us to know as to why you didn't think of applying for amnesty having been actively involved politically and having worked mainly with young people, one of the questions which was put to you earlier on was around slogans like together hand in hand, with our boxes of matches, we will liberate this country, that even political utterances like that, could in one or another have influence on the behaviour of young people, so we are still interested in knowing your understanding of the amnesty process and your reluctance to make use of this in terms of giving us the perspective of what was happening at the time.

MRS MADIKIZELA-MANDELA: Thank you Madam.  I explained at the time I think when you put that question across, comrade Thabo Mbeki raised the issue with me.  And I explained to him ... (tape ends) ...