Special Hearings — Mandela United Football Club Hearings — UNKNOWN

MR JOSEPH: Mr Mandela, my surname is Joseph, I represent Katiza Cebekhulu and Emma Nicholson.  Let me just talk to you about the background to the events I have in mind.  1986, 1987, 1988, what was going on in our country and in particular what was taking place in Soweto.
 Let me start off by inviting you who is in the best position to tell us this, and let me start off by telling you this because what you are going to tell us is known by everyone, we all live in this country, we all lived through those horrible times and we all know what was going on and I would in very broad terms say that what was going on in Soweto at this time, was akin to mayhem, the streets were burning, the Security Forces were raiding, MK cadres were coming in and you take it from there, do you agree with me, is that more or less what was happening?

MRS MADIKIZELA-MANDELA: Why more or less, that is very broad?

MR JOSEPH: Yes, well you help us Mrs Mandela, you assist us?

MRS MADIKIZELA-MANDELA: I can only state that the African National Congress was waging a struggle underground and there was anarchy all over the country.

MR JOSEPH: Help us Mrs Mandela.

MRS MADIKIZELA-MANDELA: I beg your pardon?

MR JOSEPH: Help us, these Commissioners want to know what it was like, help us?

MRS MADIKIZELA-MANDELA: You know I am not with you, I don't get that question.

CHAIRPERSON: I thought you just had five minutes and if it is common cause that we knew all of us knew, what it was about - I am sorry.  I gave you misleading information, we can't take lunch quite at one o'clock, the lunch hasn't arrived, but that doesn't mean - you've still got five minutes.

MR JOSEPH: I've been misled.

CHAIRPERSON: Because I think we want to go after you.

MR JOSEPH: May I ask you, are you limiting the cross-examination to five minutes?

DR BORAINE: Chairperson, we did mention that there was five minutes left, would anybody like to use those five minutes and could finish in that time, that was our assumption?  But may I say in support of the Chairman, that to ask Mrs Madikizela-Mandela to give a lecture on how the situation was, would take her hours and we haven't got that sort of time.  Perhaps if you put your questions.

MR JOSEPH: All right, let me help. It wouldn't take hours, it can be done in minutes.

DR BORAINE: I think you should put your questions.

MR JOSEPH: It could be done in moments.  During this period of time, there was a state of emergency, that horrific things were taking place all over the country, including Soweto, people were being killed, is that correct?

MRS MADIKIZELA-MANDELA: That is correct.

MR JOSEPH: Necklacing was taking place, is that correct?

MRS MADIKIZELA-MANDELA: That may also be correct.

MR JOSEPH: The victims of the necklacing were in the main what type of people?

MRS MADIKIZELA-MANDELA: Well, I don't really know, I am not an expert in that part of your history.

MR JOSEPH: You don't know, you've got no idea who it is?

MRS MADIKIZELA-MANDELA: I do not know who was necklaced at that stage and why.

MR JOSEPH: You don't know who the victims were?

MRS MADIKIZELA-MANDELA: The victims were supposed to be collaborators with the government.

MR JOSEPH: Collaborators and informants, is that correct.

MRS MADIKIZELA-MANDELA: Some of them yes.

MR JOSEPH: Correct?

MRS MADIKIZELA-MANDELA: Yes, but I cannot vouch for that, that was just public information.

MR JOSEPH: Yes, now during April 1986 you are reported to have said the following "together, hand in hand, with our boxes of matches and necklaces, we shall liberate this country".  Firstly are you correctly, is this a correct record of what you said?

MRS MADIKIZELA-MANDELA: I thought we came here to establish facts and to reconcile this country over atrocities, perpetrated by either ourselves or those people were working with.  I did not necklace anybody.

MR JOSEPH: Madam, I am just asking.

MRS MADIKIZELA-MANDELA: And a description of the events of the time, is not part of the perpetration of acts of atrocities.

CHAIRPERSON: Can you just answer the question.

MR JOSEPH: Just try and answer the question.

CHAIRPERSON: The question I think one would grant the preamble as it were, that you gave.

MR JOSEPH: This document purports to record words you articulated.  Is the record correct?

MRS MADIKIZELA-MANDELA: I did make mention of those words in describing the situation of the time.  It was not in relation to any particular necklacing I had personally done.

MR JOSEPH: There is no suggestion whatsoever Madam, that you personally committed any offence like that and let me put your mind at ease, there is no decision at this Committee or this Commission can make which is to the effect that you were guilty of any offence.  You are presumed to be innocent.

MRS MADIKIZELA-MANDELA: Well, statements made at that time under those conditions, during our struggle.

MR JOSEPH: They were acceptable.

MRS MADIKIZELA-MANDELA: They were descriptive of that time.

MR JOSEPH: Let me take the liberty of telling you how I understand your words.

MRS MADIKIZELA-MANDELA: You may have understood it whichever way you pleased and you are free to do so.

MR JOSEPH: Let me rather then ask you this, will you convey what you intended the ordinary reader should have understood by these words.

MRS MADIKIZELA-MANDELA: I did not intend anything, I was describing the situation at the time.

MR JOSEPH: You did not intend any person who heard these words, to understand anything from these words?

MRS MADIKIZELA-MANDELA: I was describing the situation at the time.  And it is my final answer.

CHAIRPERSON: Is it possible to, I think you are representing the two clients you spoke of and it may be helpful, I don't want to ...

MR JOSEPH: May I interrupt at this stage, we are all over here and we look to you for guidance what you want.  I know what the legislation says, the legislation says simply that the witnesses are here to answer questions.
 I can only interpret that injunction by the legislature to mean that relevant questions are put to them and they are expected to answer those questions.  Now relevancy in a period of time in which to answer the questions, do not go hand in hand.  It seems to me that there were allegations against this lady that she participated or had a hand in offences which resulted in people who prima facie referred to as informers being killed.
 In this five minutes of cross-examination you have heard the evidence, and here is this statement which can well be interpreted to mean that the speaker intended listeners to participate in certain events or to act in a certain manner in order to achieve the liberation of our country.
 It is a simple question, did you intend certain people who heard your language to terminate the lives of collaborators or informers, is that what you intended?

MRS MADIKIZELA-MANDELA: I have you the answer.

MR SEMENYA: Chairperson, I think my learned colleague would want to admit at the same breath that is understanding the legislation, that that relevance must surely have to do with the items which have been identified in this subpoena and not a single case in that subpoena relates to people who had been necklaced.  He is the one who must just admit that the relevance of this questions about those utterances, if not just a pure political statement, have no relevance whatsoever with the issues before you Chairperson.