Amnesty Hearings — Bloemfontein — UNKNOWN

ADV MEMANI: What I'm saying, Mr Chairman, is that cannot be true from a working point of view because there were applications, there were factual allegations already made by Ngo at that stage.  And that my understanding is that if you are sitting with a situation we you want to take a point that legally something is not before forum, you do not then not even consult with clients to deal with people who are implicated, to deal those allegations.
    What was raised was something amounting to a point in limine.  His name was mentioned in the application.

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, I would like to try to be of assistance so that we can cut this short.  Could my learned friend just inform you and me in regard to which incident this cross-examination does now deal - which incident is it which he expected Mr Miningwa to have made an affidavit about in regard to Mr Ngo because we're not certain what he's referring to.

CHAIRPERSON: Will you reply to that?

ADV MEMANI: Mr Chairman, at the present moment I'm dealing with what you referred to, that was at page 30 - A30
"Members of the security branch who were present who organised, were organised by Kenneth Coetzee and Colonel Stephenson to beat up and torture with number eleven Miningwa"

MR VISSER: Well you see Mr Chairman, that's the, really, with all due respect, that's the point.  That document, as you know very well, became available only later Mr Chairman, it wasn't even part of the papers on the first occasion that came out later.   On the first occasion Mr Chairman, what you had was an application form, form 1 and then there was a document, the status of which was obscure from pages 8 to 14 of bundle C.
    The other pages only came later, with all due respect.  And what is more Mr Chairman, is even if pages 8 to 14 should've or ought to have been regarded by us as an application as it stood, as an application for amnesty, Mr Miningwa is not implicated there.
    And I would challenge my learned friend to tell us where he is implicated.

ADV MEMANI: The problem Mr Chairman, Mr Visser can't run away from it, the problem Mr Chairman is that he's client says that he was never told about this incident, he only heard about it at the hearings.
    And I'm saying that during consultation, he's legal representatives would have put these passages to him.

CHAIRPERSON: They should perhaps have they may not you could comment and use that as argument.  He has said it wasn't put to him.

ADV MEMANI: But at this stage I'm taking it through him and we are going by his evidence that he was not told about it.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, he said that right you've got that one, let's go on.

ADV MEMANI: As the chair pleases.
    Now, I'm putting it to you that the only reason why your attorneys would not take instructions - would not take your version on this issue, would be that you did not have any proper instructions to give them.

MR MININGWA: I don't think that is a question which would direct to me.   I did not know about that, it's not my work maybe to know what I did not know. I only learnt it from here, then I set out only reply there as we were.  It was spoken before the Commission, I didn't know about it before.
    It didn't appear on the allegations.  I only know about two allegations, and that's what I've put on my statement. I only learnt about other allegations here. I thought that  I would reply to those allegations when I appeared before this Commission.

ADV MEMANI: And did you become aware that - I'll leave this matter then.

CHAIRPERSON: ...[indaudible]

INTERPRETER: The interpreter cannot hear the speaker.

CHAIRPERSON: One can argue just as much that he should have done so.  There are all sorts of technical aspects of that nature which you can mention during argument and I'm sure other people will also mention.

ADV MEMANI: I'm sure, Mr Chairman, I'll be able to distinguish Motsamai from Miningwa in this regard Mr Chairman.
    If I may take instructions, Mr Chairman.

ADV MEMANI: Now, you know Citi Mzuzwana,isn't it?

MR MIMINGWA: I know him very well, I know him very well.

ADV MEMANI: And you've already told us that he a trade unionist and you were working with trade unions.

MR MIMINGWA: That is correct.

ADV MEMANI: And his house later got bombed, isn't it?

MR MIMINGWA: I received such a report then I went verify, then I found it to be that the big window was broken and that curtains seemed to be burned.

ADV MEMANI: Now, Mr Motsamai has told us that you participated in that petrol bombing.

MR MIMINGWA: I'm suprised.  If he would be reminded that the time when he - when he made his statement, he could have written first that I was there in that incident.   It's nowhere where he said I was  present he only say I was present at Mzuzwana's parent's house.
    That is why I told this Commission that I know for the first time that Mzuzwana's house was burnt.  I only know of Citi Mzuzwana's house then later I went to find out and verify as whether is it true.  I learnt that from my informer.

ADV MEMANI: And, by the way when I say Citi's, when I said Citi's, I meant Citi's parental home.

CHAIRPERSON: Well that's a different building, isn't it?

ADV MEMANI: Yes, Mr Chair, I'm sorry I was not precise.
	Now, can we get clarity now, can we get certainty about your answer.  Mr Motsamsai told us that you were present when  Citi Mzuzwana's parental home was petrol bombed.

MR MIMINGWA: As I said, that I learnt here in this hearing about Citi Mzuzwana's parental home, I didn't know about that before.  When I received those allegations, I knew that Citi's parent's home was burned.  I only learnt about Citi's house which I went to verify, then I found that it was true, it was burnt.

ADV MEMANI: Subject to correction, on Friday you told us that ...[intervention]

ADV DE JAGER: I think Mr Memani whether you were present when Citi's parent's house was bombed.

MR MIMINGWA: Mr Chairperson, I replied and say I did not know, I was not present.  That is why I said I found that allegation for the first time when I saw Motsamai's allegations.  I said I didn't know anything about that.

ADV MEMANI: Now, if I remember correctly, on Friday you told us that you where sent to go and have a look at Citi Mtswana's house because you worked with Citi. Isn't it?

MR MIMINGWA: I didn't say that, I did not say that.

ADV MEMANI: What was the reason why you were sent to go and have a look at the house?

MR MIMINGWA: It may me come clearly, I don't know as whether you talk about Citi's parent's house or Citi's house.  I went to see Citi's house, not Citi's parents house.
    I went to his house after I learnt about that from my informer, then my immediate superior said when I made a report about about hearing from the informer about that incident, he said I should go and verify as whether the house was burnt.  That is Citi's house, not Citi's parent's house.

ADV MEMANI: And I was putting it to you that my recollection is that you said your superior sent you to go and have a look because you were working with Citi, Citi was in your profile.

MR MIMINGWA: I was not working with Citi, you speak as if he was my colleague.  Because he was an activist in the trade unions, I was working - he was my suspect.

ADV MEMANI: I menat to say ...[Sotho - no translation] it's unfortunate that it came in a different way in Sotho to  you.

CHAIRPERSON: You said he was working with Citi.

ADV MEMANI: As the Chair pleases.
    Now, you said that your superior sent you because you were working about Citi, maybe you should use that word.

MR VISSER: No, he said it was because he was his suspect, Mr Chairman. I don't understand "working with" either.

ADV MEMANI: I don't think it makes a difference.