Amnesty Hearings — Sebokeng — 1998-07-14

CHAIRPERSON: Well, I was under the impression and that is how I have always understood your argument and that is when these initial applications were submitted on the 10th or the 9th May 1997, there were directions, whether you construe them a directions or requests or whatever, that further information had to be furnished and that was in relation to all those individuals who were named in that covering letter which includes Mr Khubeka.

MR STRYDOM: I just want to check, as far as my memory serves me, we did not receive a further request in regard to Mr Khubeka and the reason for that is we at that stage stopped acting for Mr Khubeka because Mr Khubeka, on his own accord, went ahead and applied for ..[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: No, no, I mean the original one, after the - you see the applications were preceded by a discussion between the attorney, the erstwhile attorneys of the applicants and -Mr Mpshe I think it is.

MR STRYDOM: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, that's when the letter of the - I think it's some time in November - it was.

MR STRYDOM: Mr Chairman, you're right.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, which called upon the - which reminded the applicants that information which they had undertaken to furnish as at that date, not yet been furnished and there was a request that the processing of this application is much more difficult.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, that is indeed so, I think the letter is added to my - next to my heads of argument and Mr Khubeka's name was included there but unfortunately at that stage, the legal team was under the impression that he provided another application and he didn't want this legal team to act for him any further.  So it's an unfortunate situation that those particulars were not granted but I still say that that situation can be cured by granting that information at this late hour.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, what is the position now?  Is the position that Mr Khubeka has subsequently submitted an application, duly completed?

MR STRYDOM: According to what he tell me ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Are those your instruction?

MR STRYDOM: Those are my instructions, but unfortunately, that application cannot be located and we can even..[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Well has someone looked for it?

MR STRYDOM: I asked Mr Wessel Janse van Rensburg to look for it but my information is that he cannot find it.

CHAIRPERSON: But where is it?

MR STRYDOM: Well, Mr Khubeka did not keep a copy but he had given it to a representative of the TRC.

MR BRINK: Mr Chairman, my information is that Mr Khubeka in the first instance submitted and HRV statement, he did also submit a statement, an "application" incomplete but although it is said that he and I have no reason to doubt what he says being the truth, no further Amnesty Application completed form has been located in the offices in Cape Town but I will certainly investigate when I get back.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay.  In view of the uncertainty as to whether or not Mr Khubeka did submit an application, I do not know whether it would be proper to deal with his application at this stage.  Now, shouldn't we stand his application down and then perhaps investigate whether there is another application that he completed?

MR STRYDOM: I think I should argue on the basis that that other application cannot be located and if that cannot be located the fact of the matter is that he initially applied with the other people, the other applicants and that defective application and subsequently further particulars and other documents ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Which called upon to ..[inaudible] and has not [inaudible] so what do we do?

MR STRYDOM: I would submit that that's not a bother, it still can be provided.

CHAIRPERSON: That's why I was saying to you that shouldn't his application stand down so that you can deal with those difficulties?

MR STRYDOM: I accept that.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: The other point I want to make, it's all contained in my heads of argument - the crux of the matter is that I rely on the interpretation of Section 19 (i) so that's basically my argument on behalf of the applicants.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mbatha?

MR STRYDOM: Mr Mbatha creates somewhat of a problem, he cannot be located and I ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mbatha cannot be located?

MR STRYDOM: He is in Natal somewhere that's the only information I have, I don't know where in Natal.

CHAIRPERSON: So he's not even before the Committee?

MR STRYDOM: He's not here, he hasn't been here since the beginning of the hearings, he's apparently critically ill.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, well shouldn't we then strike his application off the roll?

MR STRYDOM: I would ask that that also stand over until the next hearing.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, if he's not here we have no idea whether he will be coming to the Committee at all in future.

MR STRYDOM: Well the situation may be that ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Well if application is struck off the roll, the matter can always be reinstated as and when he becomes available.

MR STRYDOM: Well in that situation, yes, I thought finally struck off the roll means a final situation.  If it's not a final - if he's just struck off the roll temporarily.

CHAIRPERSON: What it is that it is removed from the roll, it's not that it is withdrawn, it is just removed.

MR STRYDOM: In court terms struck off - if that's the situation I can go ahead ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Well he can be reinstated, both of them require further investigation in so far as we're concerned.  Mr Brink, what is your attitude?

MR BRINK: Yes, I have no objecting to that but it seems to me applicants will not be heard today, none of the present applicants and in that event my suggestion would be in support of Mr Stydom's original submission.  If those matters just stand over till the next time, if they're not here, things haven't been resolved they can get struck off the roll then, that's my suggestion.

CHAIRPERSON: Well Mr Khubeka is here?

MR STRYDOM: He is in fact here.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, Mr Berger is he here?

MR BERGER: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, you see the difficulty is with Mr Mbatha who is not here.  So why should we have before us his application if he's not before us here?  Mr Berger, what do you say with regard to those two applications?

MR BERGER: Chairperson, I have no feeling either way on Mr  Khubeka - Mr Mbatha that is.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR BERGER: As far as Mr Khubeka is concerned, his application isn't before the Committee either.  As I understood the position from last week, the understanding was that he wasn't before the Committee.  There are no papers of his before the Committee, that's certain.

MR STRYDOM: I just - in fact one of the documents faxed to us as an example of the defective applications initially filed is one in relation to Mr Khubeka.  I have it in my possession, in fact it's a full document, six page document on behalf of Mr Khubeka, so I have such a document.

MR BERGER: One of the defective applications, that is what my learned friend is referring to?

MR LAX: Correct.

MR BERGER: Well I'm prepared to argue on that basis.

CHAIRPERSON: What I wanted to find out is whether, shouldn't these matters stand over because of these problems?

MR BERGER: Well Mr Khubeka's application can be dealt with together with the other applicants because we are concerned with the original defective applications and we are told that he made one.

CHAIRPERSON: But he, according to Mr Strydom's instructions, he completed an application subsequently.

MR BERGER: No, Mr Strydom is not saying that.

MR LAX: He is.

CHAIRPERSON: He's saying that.

MR STRYDOM: In fact, he tells me and it's beared out by the fact that in that other statement of his to report a gross violation he in fact said that "I've already applied for amnesty but I'm not sure if the documents are properly filled in because I didn't have the knowledge" or something like that but it was said.