Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1998-12-01

IAN MUNRO PHILLIPS: I didn't know at that stage the identities of people, who were fulfilling particular functions, that were actually being organised by comrade Mandla, but obviously when one goes out into the communities and things, and you are dealing with issues of this nature, I would be introduced and I would meet comrade Jabu or whatever.
	Now whether Jabu was the person's proper name or not, I would have absolutely no idea, most probably not.  It wasn't necessary for me to know the full ID's and CV's of the people that I am giving political education classes to.  It would be a case of being able to recognise people visually, rather than in terms of a name or an identity.

MR WILLS: And in respect of your role in the procurement of firearms and ammunition in the province, you have never been arrested or prosecuted?

IAN MUNRO PHILLIPS: No.

MR WILLS: Thank you Mr Chairperson.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR WILLS

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Wills.  Mr Hewitt, do you have any questions to ask Dr Phillips?

MR HEWITT: Mr Chairman, I have no interest in this applicant.
NO CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR HEWITT

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Thabete, do you have any questions?

MS THABETE: A few Mr Chairman.  Dr Phillips, I realise in your application, page 2 of your application, page 18 of the bundle, at 9(a), the acts for which you are applying amnesty for, you haven't filled anything, what would you say you applying amnesty for?

IAN MUNRO PHILLIPS: All right, first of all, quite frankly, I found this application form a little bit of a mind boggling experience.  It is not clear.
	I think more importantly, we need to understand that at the time that the TRC was constituted, and the processes of application and amnesty application were being asked for, there was a great deal of confusion out there as to what constituted an applicable offence and what didn't.

MS THABETE: Okay.

IAN MUNRO PHILLIPS: For our part, for my part as an individual, I did not consider any of my participation with anything to do with the ANC, including SDU, as criminal in the sense of being something that I should be ashamed of in any particular manner.
	However, it was important and it became clear during those particular years, that we as a political organisation and in my capacity as an REC member, I fulfilled a political leadership position at a certain level.  We did take certain actions, which allowed operators on the ground, to conduct self defence.
	In some of those instances, self defence was conducted which led to casualties either through death or whatever.  In that sense, we were unable and I was unable to say that I was completely cut off from that particular situation.
	It is imperative and the ANC has never been shy, which is one of the reasons quite frankly why the ANC almost solely amongst political parties, has wholeheartedly supported the processes of the TRC and participated in its work in a voluntary manner.  We believe that it is important for the organisation and people in leadership positions, to take responsibility for the policies that we adopted and also for the way in which those policies were implemented because the two go hand in hand.
	In terms of specific acts that I, criminal acts, I don't know of any, but we thought and I thought at that particular time and on advice of other people and lawyers within the ANC as well, that what better way to actually address these issues, than through the amnesty process itself and to do it in that particular manner.

MS THABETE: I was not suggesting in any way that you should specify what criminal offences you have done, obviously we understand it was all under a political context, but what I wanted to know is, what would you say you are applying amnesty for in this situation, because you have told us the background, you have told us what you have done.
	Briefly, what would you say you are applying amnesty for?  Is it for the establishment of SDU's, is it for the communication that you were involved in?  That is what I am trying to ascertain.
	Or, are you applying for, you are taking general responsibility for whatever happened?  That is what I am trying to ascertain from you?

IAN MUNRO PHILLIPS: Well, at one level there is general responsibility, but of course you don't get amnesty for general responsibility.

MS THABETE: Exactly.

IAN MUNRO PHILLIPS: But the point is, here we were dealing with what formally during those days, would have been classified as unlicensed firearms, unlawful possession of arms, etc, etc, the trafficking in those things, and for those particular acts, yes, obviously I would suggest that that is what I am applying for amnesty and for the facilitation of other people getting those goodies at the end of the day for whatever purpose they would have used them for.
	In the sense that I don't know, I am not a lawyer by any means, but in terms of accessories after facts and all of these funny things, maybe that comes into it as well.

MS THABETE: My last question to you is, did you at any stage have any direct dealings with the SDU's in communities?

IAN MUNRO PHILLIPS: How would you, what do you mean by direct?

MS THABETE: Maybe you gave an instruction, maybe you supervised certain actions that were taking place there, maybe you at some stage got instructions to do something in the communities where SDU's were?  Weren't you involved in something like that?

IAN MUNRO PHILLIPS: The only instruction if you can call it an instruction, was the constant plea to SDU's and communities to defend themselves and to do it to the best of their ability.
	But that is not a cause as saying to here is a particular SDU, you are in a particular situation, now go and attack that house.  There is no instruction of that particular nature because I think as has also been indicated, we've got to understand very clearly the nature of how the SDU's operated.
	The SDU's are not military formations in the same way that I would classify MK Units as.  MK Units are soldiers, SDU's are not soldiers in that sense.  Soldiers can be part of SDU's, but more important the whole rational of the SDU is for that SDU in a community to be able to identify the people that it needs to act against and the actions that they need to take.
	That is their job, it doesn't come from me from Durban, going into Port Shepstone or Gamuleke and saying your job is to attack that person.  I am not from there.  The identification of those comes from the root source, but the justification for that is something that we could actually provide.

MS THABETE: So are you saying to me you wouldn't get instructions of how the communities or the SDU's were supposed to defend themselves against whoever was attacking them.
	They were just given an instruction that defend yourself in whichever way you deem fit, is that what you are saying to me?

IAN MUNRO PHILLIPS: Yes, the training of members in the practical elements of self defence, the responsibility of the trained people, the MK people who would necessarily be linked to them, so how they actually go about that and the instruction in which way to point the rifle etc, that responsibility not necessarily mine, however, what our job was to say that when you are undergoing that training, remember that in your mind, this is the purpose for which you are undergoing this training.
	This is how you need to conduct yourself as best as possible in that situation.
	Defence must be done with the intention of defence only.  Don't think that you are going to be part of an SDU and then you are going to use the same skills to go and rob banks.  That would be - so it is that general sort of level, but the actual practical thing, that is somebody else's responsibility and would have fallen officially in terms of ANC policy, to the MK contingent, that was linked to and provided for the assistance of training of that nature to the SDU's.