Amnesty Hearings — Potchefstroom — UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN: : ...you were on your way from the meeting to the police station to manhandle him?

ANSWER: On our way to the police station we did nothing to him because I said to him your problem will be solved by the police and we were taking him to the police station as ordered.

UNKNOWN: : When were you advised by Oupa that Ndlameni and his gang were colluding with the police?

ANSWER: He told us this before the deceased was killed.

UNKNOWN: : What month, the deceased was killed in July, 21 July, was this in July or was this in June when...him giving this kind of information to you, was he still a member of this vigilante group, this Oupa was he still a member?

ANSWER: We got information that he was also a member of this vigilant(?) group but we didn't have full evidence because every time when these terrible acts took place his name would not appear among the members who were there.

UNKNOWN: : Do you believe in what he said that Ndlameni and his gang were colluding with the police?

ANSWER: We had never seen him for quite a long time and when he came to us he said he was still around and he was together with Ndlameni and there's a certain money that they receive and we don't get anything we only involved in the
3b	struggle /...
115	P LEBONA
struggle, the ANC is not giving us any money and they are working together with the police, they receive ammunitions from the police, they are giving money so that they can disrupt the activities of the ANC.

UNKNOWN: : ...name of the police who was giving money to this gang and Ndlameni?

ANSWER: The name I remember well is Nope but the others I have forgotten, this took place long time ago.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS KHAMPEPE
QUESTIONS BY JUDGE NGOEPE

<UNKNOWN>: : Mr Lebona you said to a question that all that you had said in your trial was not the truth, so I assume that quite properly what you meant was that before what you are telling the Committee now is the truth or should be the truth.   I just want to make this observation, not only as a benefit to yourself but to other aspirant applicants and most probably your co-applicants.   You see my brother asked you a question about the identical statements made by yourself and your co-applicants.   It actually went further than that, the contents of the application forms like paragraph 11(b) for example, are actually identical.   In fact it turns out that if the dates on which they are signed are anything to go by, it turns out that they made their statements before you made your statement, so there can't be any question of them having copied from your statement.   If the dates are anything to go by and if they are identical, the probabilities are that you copied from their statements.  Are you sure that you did not take from their statements, the contents of their application forms like paragraph 11(b)?

ANSWER: What is written in my statement is what I
3b	personally /...
116	P LEBONA
personally said that is what I know because I knew that before the court of law I told lies.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: : ...they signed the application forms before you signed yours, the fact that the contents of some paragraphs are identical you say that you didn't copy from theirs it was just by accident?

ANSWER: I can't explain, was this a coincidence because what they wrote is what they know and what I wrote is what I know.

CHAIRPERSON: : Re-examination?
NO RE-EXAMINATION

CHAIRPERSON: : Is there any way in which this problem might be resolved as to how it came about that these statements are in identical terms and the similarity is so great that one does not want to reject this witness's evidence as being untruthful if there is unearthed some explanation as to how it came about that all these statements are in the same language.

ATTORNEY: Chairperson I will prefer to consult further on this aspect.   I did consult on it but I will prefer to consult further on it.   The clarification I am seeking from this Committee is whether the possibility of the Committee accepting supplementary affidavits to the ones that, to the statements that are before the Committee, whether those will be acceptable to, that was another option that one was entertaining.

CHAIRPERSON: : ...oral evidence here will be far better than any affidavit wouldn't it be, because it could be tested by questioning.

ATTORNEY: I accept that.   ...have consulted extensively about the problem that the Committee raised in relation to
3b	the /...
117
the statement presented before the Committee allegedly to be from the applicant.   Chairperson my instructions are as follows - when the applications were being made they were made in prison.  All the applicants were in one cell and as they were in one cell, with the advices from the prominent figures from the ANC, and in particular they name mentioned here is the one of Mr Oupa (indistinct) who is the member of parliament for the ANC National Assembly.   Following those advices then they assisted each other.   Now in assisting each other then they charged Mr Dlanjwa.  Dlanjwa, Chairperson is one of the applicants in the matter that will follow.   The reason why he himself in particular was charged of assisting I am told it was because of his educational background.  When he was arrested and convicted Chairperson, Mr Dlanjwa was a third year law student.   I talked to him in this regard and he advised me as well that he did so, however whatever that he put down in writing is what was dictated upon by the applicant and the two other co-applicant in this matter.   
	Chairperson this problem is similar to what we may experience in the coming matter.   The statements were as well written by the same Dlanjwa.   Chairperson my moving away from, these were my instructions, however when I raised an appeal the fact that it be taken, I appeal that it be taken by this Committee to cognisance that the forms were filled in prison, the applicants had no legal assistance.  They may not have understood the questions on their own and hence sought assistance of their major (indistinct).  Thank you Mr Chairperson.

JUDGE WILSON: : There is nothing wrong as far as I'm concerned with them getting assistance from one another, but
3b	my /...
118
my recollection is that your client giving evidence when I
asked him questions this morning said that they were in different prisons, they didn't consult together.   Am I now to accept that he was lying the whole time?

ATTORNEY: Chairperson the truth of the matter is about the applicant before the Committee now, I know when I had to consult with him in prison as well I had a problem, it's true that he was in the prison called "Rooigrond" in Mmabatho, when others were kept here in Potchefstroom prison, so what he was telling the Committee that he was not with others may be true in that sense.   However, I am unable to explain further whether at that time of the dictation of these statements he was still in Rooigrond or he was with others and then he was moved to Rooigrond.

JUDGE WILSON: : So they were all together when this was dictated, there is no doubt about that.

ATTORNEY: Chairperson those were my instructions.

CHAIRPERSON: : Thank you very much for clearing it up I appreciate it.   Are you calling the next witness?
WITNESS IS EXCUSED
3b	SOLOMON /...
119
SOLOMON LEKITLANA (ss)
EXAMINATION BY COUNSEL
	Chairperson before I commence may I seek your assistance in this regard?   In the light of the fact that it has become conclusive now, clear that the statements put before the Committee are of identical nature and from one source, I wondered whether will it still be preferred that the applicant as he sits there should repeat or should he cast clarity on what already has been said?

CHAIRPERSON: : I do not think any purpose will be served in a repetition of what we have heard but I think he is required to talk about his participation that has resulted in his application.