Amnesty Hearings — Vanderbijlpark — 1999-05-04

MR LOWIES: The point simply is the following, then that could not have been a reason for you applying.  The fact that the police are lying is not a reason for you applying for amnesty, correct?

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: I still maintain that I was involved in the Boipatong Massacre.

MR LOWIES: Are you retracting your evidence that the reason for applying for amnesty is because lies are being told at this forum which was what you said clearly yesterday and earlier on today?

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: No, I still maintain that I had come forward to tell the people of Boipatong what happened that evening.

MR LOWIES: But yet you would not tell the people from Sebokeng what happened because had you not been forced you would never have confessed to these crimes?  Do you see the difference?  Do you see the glaring inconsistency?

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: I have already submitted an application with regards to the Sebokeng incident.

MR LOWIES: No sir ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: ...(inaudible) any further, man says that the reason why he came forward is because he realised that the applicants were not telling the truth and secondly because he was also involved.  He was involved in the Sebokeng attacks, we know that he - whatever he may have said, you know, in the criminal court, I'm not too sure it is of any consequence to us here.

MR LOWIES: I would agree with you on one regard but I also disagree with respect but I just put the following to you Chair in respect the motive as you will see from the application of this witness is suspect and everything ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: A motive to do what?

MR LOWIES: For applying for amnesty.

CHAIRPERSON: But he has told us why he's applying for amnesty in regard to this.  He said that yesterday, he's repeated it today on more than one occasion.

MR LOWIES: No but Sir, with respect ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: And the record speaks for itself.

MR LOWIES: Chair if you rule that I can't proceed then I will abide by it but I would submit that there are various aspects that's still got to be canvassed in this regard and I would beg you to afford me the opportunity of doing so.

CHAIRPERSON: Provided you get on with the work, we can't ...(indistinct).  Go on with the questions.

MR LOWIES: Thank you.
	Mr Nosenga, the point is simply the following.  You admitted on two occasions today that had you not been tortured by the police in regard to the Sebokeng shooting, you would not have confessed up until today, correct?

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: Yet for an offence you are not convicted you apply for amnesty, that does not make sense.  Why in the one would you never have but in the one you do so freely and voluntarily?

CHAIRPERSON: Do you understand the question or do you want me to simplify the question to you?  Here is the question.  You were involved in the Sebokeng attack, do you understand that?

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay.  You were not prepared to admit that to the police but because of the torture you admitted your part in the Sebokeng attack?

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: You've told us that had it not been for the attack, I mean for the torture up till today you would not have disclosed that?

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Right.

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: I will not have been sentenced for it.

CHAIRPERSON: If you had not been convicted you would not have disclosed the Sebokeng attack and your role in that attack?

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: Yes that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Now in regard to the Boipatong Massacre you were not arrested?

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: What you are being asked therefore is why would you confess in regard to the attack, in regard to which you've not been convicted and not have been tortured and be unwilling to confess in regard to what you really took part in, tortured and so on.  Do you understand the question?

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: Yes.  I mentioned before that I was involved in the Boipatong Massacre.  No one coerced me to apply for amnesty, I did it out of my own violation.

MR LOWIES: Mr Nosenga, the point is, you raised a point and that's why I'm taking it up with you.  In the nine charges where you were convicted of murder you also killed a woman by the name of Elizabeth Gadebe.  You killed a sixteen year old child, Justice Skumeng and you killed a seventeen year old child, Jacob Ditebe.  You fired shots at a lady by the name of Jane Mbele and Maria Mlangene.  So what is the difference between those attacks and the Boipatong attacks if you want to rely on the fact that ladies were involved and children involved?

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: I mentioned before that the Boipatong Massacre was not out of my own personal violation but it was following an order issued by Mtwana Zulu and I was with Tswe ...(indistinct)

MR LOWIES: Sorry, the last part was not caught by myself in interpretation Chair?

INTERPRETER: The applicant said that the applicant was with the people he mentioned when he went to Sebokeng to launch that attack, he was explaining that the attack on Boipatong was not out of his personal violation.

CHAIRPERSON: This is his question, perhaps if you answer this question or can't answer it let us know.  You see what counsel is trying to put to you is this, why would you be willing to tell us about Boipatong attack because you were not arrested in regard to that attack and you were never convicted and yet be unwilling but for, you know, your confession to disclose your involvement in the Sebokeng attack.  Did you understand the question?

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: I did mention the Sebokeng incident in my application.

CHAIRPERSON: But this follows up on the line of questioning that was being pursued in which you indicated that had it not been for the torture, had it not been for the conviction, you would not have admitted your role in the Sebokeng massacre or attack?

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: Yes that is so but because I've already been convicted there's nothing further that I can hide.

CHAIRPERSON: Now the question therefore is why would you be willing to disclose your role in the Boipatong where you were never tortured, where you were never convicted and yet be unwilling to disclose your involvement in regard to your matter where admittedly you took part?  Do you understand the question?  No, no, do you understand the question or do you want me to repeat it to you in Zulu?

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: Yes I understand.  You're asking me why I volunteered the information on Boipatong.  I was present together with many others who were never convicted for that incident.  With regards to the incident in Sebokeng I submitted an application because I was involved too.

CHAIRPERSON: You would have not disclosed the role you played in Sebokeng if you had not been tortured and made to confess, is that not correct?

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: That is so.

CHAIRPERSON: You have told us that you would have not disclosed this information up to this date if you had not been tortured?

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: In other words it would have remained your secret, no one would have known about it?

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Now with regards to the Boipatong incident you were never arrested for it?

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: No one tortured you?

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: Yes that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: But you are willing to volunteer information?

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: Yes.