Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — 1999-02-17

MS THABETE: My problem Madam Chair is this, my understanding is that before they could act on killing Hapile Nduno and Elsie Mokoena, they had to verify whether they were indeed (indistinct) or not.  The evidence is that such verification did not happen.
	My next question, or my difficulty is that if such verification did not happen, doesn't that amount to them not having been accountable to, didn't they act outside what they were supposed to do, or outside their instructions, because according to Khumalo's instructions, they were supposed to verify.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I understand your difficulty.  It is a difficulty that you will be able to argue.  Just explore it, the situation for what it is whilst you are able to, but that situation you will be able to address us on as you present your legal argument.
	It is an issue appropriately dealt with in your legal argument.  You however are more confused because he has given what could amount to some contradictions.
	There is a general order given to the Unit Commanders to eliminate (indistinct), on the other side of the coin, he has already spoken about a need for a discussion with his Commanders whenever a target is identified.
	You know, you can probably go and clear the air in that respect, whether the target would also include (indistinct) for which a general order had already been issued to the Commanders.  You may proceed further to clear that aspect.

MS THABETE: Thank you, Mr Khumalo, maybe you can clarify this by saying that every time a target, someone was targeted, you had to come back and discuss on how to actually implement whatever plan you had on that target, did this involve the targets of (indistinct)?

BONGA KHUMALO: This is a very long question.  When we are talking about a target, I don't think it is correct to say a person is a target.
	I did explain before that when we are talking about a target, we strategise to try and establish whether it was necessary.  For example when talking about a target, we include the attacking of a police station.  Like when the IFP is entering the township ...

MS THABETE: Sorry Mr Khumalo, my question is does the target you are talking about, include (indistinct)?  I understand it includes police stations and whatever, my question is does it include (indistinct)?

CHAIRPERSON: Let me come in, did your understanding of targets include what you called (indistinct)?

BONGA KHUMALO: With all due respect, I don't think we understand one another on this term (indistinct).

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, we understand each other very well.  You have told us what you meant by (indistinct), you mean informers, isn't it?  That was your evidence, so we understand what you mean by (indistinct).

BONGA KHUMALO: No, I said (indistinct) is one who is regarded as an enemy in the township, it is not impimpi, specifically an enemy.

CHAIRPERSON: Were informers not regarded as the enemy?  Is that what you are saying, they do not fall within the definition of an enemy?

BONGA KHUMALO: Yes, they are part of (indistinct).  Yes, they are.  What I am saying here is that when we are talking about a target, we are referring to the enemy, that includes for example when Inkatha, when we receive information that at such a time Inkatha will be coming in their vehicles and we would sit down and plan an ambush.  In that instance, we are talking about a target, deciding whether a certain Unit should operate alone in a certain area.
	We are not talking here about an individual as (indistinct), discussing how such a person should be killed.  That is what I was trying to explain when I was saying that we strategised prior to the action.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Khumalo, you are giving your evidence in a fashion that makes it difficult to understand you.  You are supposed to have been called in to assist us in understanding the applications of the applicants.  You are making it extremely difficult to be on the same wavelength with you, wittingly or unwittingly so.
	Unfortunately you are not talking to people who are unaccustomed to terms like targets, to terms like (indistinct).  We have become accustomed to such terms, we have been busy with this process for almost three years.  We have already heard testimony from other applicants in relation to the activities of the SDU's in different parts of our country.
	We would expect you to assist us as a General Commander of Zone 12, SDU structure.  I must register my disappointment with the manner in which evidence is being given.  I don't know whether you were prepared before you came in, to give evidence, because instead of assisting us, you are impeding our progress.  This matter is taking more than it should have taken.  We cannot allow this to go on.
	We must in so saying lay some kind of blame to Ms Moloisane whom we expect as Counsel, who is conducting an application on behalf of her applicants, to make sure that whoever comes here to give evidence, has been properly prepared to give such evidence, and is in a position to assist us in coming to a just and fair decision.
	I have found you to be an extremely difficult person to follow in the manner in which you have given your evidence.  I thought it was so during your evidence in chief, but to my surprise it is so when you are also being questioned by the 
Evidence Leader, it is so when the members of the Committee are trying to assist you in trying to understand, in trying to comprehend your evidence.
	You are making it very difficult for us to understand what you are saying.  We are now going to take a short adjournment and when we come back, we shall proceed with your evidence.  I want to give you the benefit of the doubt and think for you that you must be tired, that you probably need a break.
	We will adjourn for five minutes.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
FINDING : VUSI SIDNEY MONONI