Amnesty Hearings — Vanderbijlpark — 1999-05-04

MR LOWIES: On your version you were part of the attack at Boipatong?

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: To come back to the structure, turn to the structure, is it correct that you are not always part and parcel of the decisions made by IFP members irrespective of at what level it is made, you as a normal member?

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: No, there were meetings called at KwaMadala Hostel and all persons living in the hostels would attend those meetings.

MR LOWIES: And if the leadership of the youth brigade had  a meeting, would you be part of that?

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: Sir, if it was a meeting for leaders then I would not be but if it was a meeting, a general meeting then I would attend that meeting.

MR LOWIES: Ja, that's the point I'm trying to make.  So it seems to me that there are different meetings, some of the meetings the leadership get together and they make decisions, correct and you're not part as a normal member of those decisions, correct?

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: Yes that is correct.

MR LOWIES: And is it not so that all the aspects pertaining to the IFP is not always related to normal members if it concerns a matter of say for instance tactics or campaigns etc.  You're not always informed of all the details because it is held at a specific meeting and you're just informed of the smaller details, correct?

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: Yes, there were matters that we were not informed all.

MR LOWIES: And I take it that if there is a meeting where a decision is made by the leadership of any party, I'm talking of any political party to attack people they would not just convey it to a normal member, that would be kept secret, not so?

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: That is news to me, I do not know about that.

MR LOWIES: No, the reason why I'm asking is we've heard evidence that it was kept secret until the very last day of the Boipatong attack ...(intervention)

MR LAX: With respect Mr Lowies, you're not being fair to the witness.  The decision as to which day the attack would happen on was kept secret.  There's evidence before us that the decision to attack was taken before the meeting in a public meeting with many people present so - and there's conflicting evidence in that regard but be that as it may, it was not true to say that the decision to attack was only taken in secret.  The date of the attack, some people have alleged, was only taken at a later stage.  So just to clarify that.

MR LOWIES: That's also the way I have it and if I've put anything different I would retract and I would rephrase.  I apologise.

CHAIRPERSON: Just to be sure, my understanding of the evidence was that in the days proceeding the real attack, everyone knew that there was going to be an attack at some point but no one knew when it was going to occur and I think the Boipatong was mentioned probably a day or two before, but still no date was fixed and again it was in response to the calls by the hostel residents that something at least must be done.

MR LOWIES: I agree, there are two important things which you raise, with respect, and I agree with those.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: The first is there was a decision to attack but there's evidence that there was no clear decision as to where the attack would be firstly and secondly there was no clear decision as to when it would be made.  That was kept secret as one of the witnesses said, I think it's Buthelezi that gave that evidence.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LOWIES: Now having heard those aspects, Mr Nosenga, my question to you is the following.  You would agree with the following proposition that not all aspects pertaining to the attack of Boipatong were conveyed to the normal members, it was kept secret by leadership, correct?  Having heard the discussion now you would agree with that?

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: It is possible they did mention that Boipatong would be attacked but they did not mention the date so I will not disagree with you.

CHAIRPERSON: I beg your pardon, just repeat what you have said?

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: I am saying as there was a meeting held discussing the attack but the date was not mentioned, it is possible that some information was withheld from ordinary members.

CHAIRPERSON: But are you saying that you knew that there was going to be an attack on Boipatong but you didn't know the date?

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: Yes I knew that an attack would be launched but I did not know on which date.

MR LOWIES: You see, you would also agree with me that the IFP operated as follows.  There was the Youth Brigade and they had their leadership.  Then there was the older people, the Indunas and they had their leadership, correct?

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: Chair, I am just trying to make a point, I would like to place one thing on record.  The evidence pertaining to the structures of how the IFP worked will be canvassed by my learned friend but in order to just make a logical conclusion, I'm just asking these as preliminary aspects and I'm not going to delve too much into them.  Having stated that my question to you is the following ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: In mind that I think that was consistently in canvassed with the applicants and that was extensively canvassed with the individual applicants.

MR LOWIES: But there may be something regarding how he views it that will be covered by my learned friend.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes indeed, yes.

MR LOWIES: I'm just trying to make the point, that I'm not going to delve too deeply into that.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes very well.

MR LOWIES: Thank you Chair.
	The point I'm trying to make is the following for purposes of what we're busy with now, you would then agree with me, if the older people, the Indunas, had their separate meeting, where they make a decision to attack people in Boipatong and in the Vaal for that matter, you would not be part of it because you are a normal member and not part of that leadership, correct?  You were not privy to that, you would not know about it?

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: No I would have known because I did learn about it because we were told as IFP members that we were going to launch an attack but it was only the dates that was not mentioned.

CHAIRPERSON: I think what counsel is putting to you is this that the leadership of the IFP would meet at some point alone, take decisions and thereafter convey those decisions to the general membership of the IFP at meetings which are attended by the ordinary members of the IFP, such as yourself?

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: Yes that is so but with regards to the Boipatong attack, we were called to a general meeting where we were informed about the attack but the date was not mentioned.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes but you have repeated now on more than one occasions that you were not told initially when Boipatong was going to be attacked.  We've heard that, you don't have to repeat that.

MR LOWIES: I'm indebted to you Chair.
	So Mr Nosenga, if they had plans at regional level to attack for instance people in Pretoria which does not concern KwaMadala, unless you are one of the attackers, you would never know about it, correct, because it does not concern you and it would remain with leadership, that's the point, do you agree?

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LOWIES: And is it not so Mr Nosenga, did you hear the question so far?  Is it not so, Mr Nosenga, that not everything that leadership decide will be conveyed to the members?  Let me give you give you an example of what I want to know from you.  If it is policy of leadership to attack everybody in the whole of Transvaal they would only convey to the people in a specific region, say for instance Boipatong, that which is necessary for Boipatong residents out of the KwaMadala residents to know and they would not convey to them all the other aspects which they have decided, correct?