Amnesty Hearings — Nelspruit — 1999-12-07

CHAIRPERSON: Truth and Reconciliation Act Number 34 of 1995 as amended and we are convened today to hear the amnesty application of Mr Hendrik Rakgotho, Application number AM 0647/97.  The Panel sitting to hear this application comprises myself, Judge Sisi Khampepe, on my right-hand side Judge Chris de Jager, on my left-hand side, Mr Wynand Malan.  Ms Mtanga.

MS MTANGA: Lulama Mtanga, the Evidence Leader.

CHAIRPERSON: Who is appearing on behalf of Mr Rakgotho?

MR MORGAN: Thank you Chairperson.  Mr Morgan from the firm Shulobande Sithole Morgan in Nelspruit.  I'm appearing on behalf of the applicant.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Morgan are we in a position to commence with this application?

MS MTANGA: Chairperson, we've got a representative for the victims.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, I wasn't aware.  May we have you on record?

MR MOKOENA: Chairperson, I'm V F Mokoena.  I'm appearing on behalf of the victims.

CHAIRPERSON: And you are appearing on which victims?

MR MOKOENA: Next of kin Saloma Maposa and  Joseph Mkonto Mkondo.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  Coming back to you Mr Morgan, are we in a position to proceed with this application?

MR MORGAN: Chairperson on behalf of the applicant at this stage, I would request that the matter be postponed for the following reasons.
	Chairperson, we have not had sufficient opportunity to consult fully with the applicant and prepare for this hearing.  The reasons therefore are as follows:
	Chairperson the TRC had confirmed that they would make the applicant available at this hall yesterday in order to enable me to consult with him.  My instructions are that he only arrived here in Nelspruit yesterday evening at 8 o'clock.  Mr Chairperson, given the issues involved in this specific application, I would need more time than is available at present to consult and represent the applicant adequately.  Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mokoena.

MR MOKOENA: Chairperson, I have obtained instructions to oppose and application for the postponement of the hearing, mainly because my clients are coming from far and it also gives them problems when they have to come to Nelspruit.  For instance, I was told, Chairperson, that my clients had to wake up at 2.00 to enable themselves to catch the transport and this is also an inconvenience to them.
	My instructions are that the Committee should oppose to the postponement and the matter be proceeded with forthwith so that it can be done over and over.  Thank you Chairperson.

JUDGE DE JAGER: Where are your clients from?

MR MOKOENA: My clients are coming from ...(indistinct) which is in the former KwaNdebele.

JUDGE DE JAGER: ...(indistinct - mike not one)  nearer to Bronkhorstspruit and even nearer to Pretoria than Nelspruit.

MR MOKOENA: That's correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Mtanga.

MS MTANGA: Chairperson, I would like to leave this matter in your hands.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Morgan, can we find out from you when you were instructed formally by the TRC in this matter?

MR MORGAN: Chairperson, if I may just be given a moment to ...  Chairperson, I received the formal instructions per letter dated 16th November 1991, which I received on the 18th November 1999.

CHAIRPERSON: And was that matter accompanied by all the documents pertaining to Mr Rakgotho's application?

MR MORGAN: Chairperson, that was not the position.  The letter advised that the comprehensive bundle for the hearing would be forwarded to our offices on the 26th of November, 1999.  That had not happened.  I received the comprehensive bundle on the 3rd of November, that would be last Friday.

CHAIRPERSON: December.

MR MORGAN: December, sorry Chairperson.  3rd of December last Friday at 3.00 p.m.  I was not in the office and I therefore received the documents yesterday morning when I attended the office.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.  And who did you communicate with at the TRC office?

MR MORGAN: I communicated with Ashika Janek.

CHAIRPERSON: And the first available opportunity you had to consult with Mr Rakgotho was this morning.

MR MORGAN: This morning, indeed, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Having considered the reasons advanced by Mr Morgan for applying for a postponement in respect of Mr Rakgotho's application, the Panel hereby grants such a postponement.  It does so, notwithstanding the objections raised by Mr Mokoena on behalf of the victims.
	We as a Committee are enjoined by the Act to be particularly compassionate to the victims.  I just want to highlight here now that the Committee has always been compassionate to victims and the fact that we are granting Mr Morgan's application does not mean we are being insensitive and lacking of the necessary compassion we are supposed to have as a Committee to victims.
	It is a fundamental right of all applicants to be properly legally represented in a hearing of this nature.  The reasons advanced by Mr Morgan for not being able to proceed with the legal representation on behalf of Mr Rakgotho, are good reason advanced.  We don't think Mr Morgan would be in a position to properly represent Mr Rakgotho if this application was allowed to proceed, in view of the complete lack of consultation as explained by him.  
	We must, however, again register our extreme displeasure at the manner in which the TRC and that is the administration of the TRC, continues to instruct attorneys to represent the interest of the applicants.  It is an untenable situation that any legal representative can be instructed at a 24 hour notice as it has happened in this case and be expected to properly represent the interest of an applicant.  
	We hope this untenable situation will not occur in the near future, particularly as we approach the new millennium because it is instances such as these that perpetuate the snowballing of this process.  
	We also with Ms Mtanga, that next time a hearing of this nature is set down, we do indeed appear to be sensitive and compassionate to victims by ensuring that a venue which is appropriately located, within the victims locality, is chosen.  This venue is completely inappropriate.  To have victims having to travel over seven hours to attend a hearing, I think it's completely insensitive and we hope such issues will be taken into account by the administration, before deciding on a venue.  This hearing is therefore postponed sine die.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS