Amnesty Hearings — Durban — UNKNOWN

MR NGUBANE: I think you have answered my question.  Unless the community otherwise directs, I am satisfied with your question.  And I am instructed that your people in fact ended Hyad, shot at the people who were in the car, including Matilda's daughter whose name is Nompumelelo; she was also injured.  And Matilda was killed there not as a result of a stray bullet, but as a result of a direct attack of the residents in that area.

DJ MKHIZE: I will make such a comment Mr Ngubane:  As you have mentioned that you were speaking about my people who hit directly at Matilda's house; I explained earlier when I was talking about this issue that when an area had been declared an ANC area, and a strategy had been adopted to attack the area, and Matilda happened to be in such an area together with the people that she was with.
	There was nothing that would have differentiated her or would have excepted her from being attacked along with the people who were in the area.  Because we were in a war situation and as I have already explained; it had already been decided that the area would be attacked for such and such a reason.  In other words even a cat could have been attacked, shot at.  A car could also have been attacked.  In a war situation that happens.  Therefore I wouldn't deny this.

MR NGUBANE: Now if you say you are not going to deny that, are you now conceding or retracting your earlier statement that Matilda was hit just by a stray bullet?

DJ MKHIZE: As explained before that I wasn't present during the attack.  What I learnt from my people was that she was hit by a stray bullet.  But that doesn't necessitate that I deny what you are telling me now; because I understand the situation that they were in when they carried out the attack.  Anybody could have been hit or injured.  That we cannot deny.  It was because of the situation at the time.

MR NGUBANE: In para 68 you speak about the kidnapping and murder of Nati Gumede.  Do you see that?

DJ MKHIZE: Yes.

MR NGUBANE: And that is a matter in respect of which you are serving sentence.  Is that right?

DJ MKHIZE: Yes, that is so.

MR NGUBANE: Now Nati Gumede, it was alleged - correct me if I'm wrong - that he was a main witness in a robbery matter against Romeo Mbambo, one of the applicants.  Is that right?

DJ MKHIZE: He was not a witness as we knew him.  We knew that he had been used in a strategy to get Romeo arrested.

MR NGUBANE: But if you say he was used in that strategy, was he used as a witness?

DJ MKHIZE: He was used to implicate Romeo in the stealing of a car.

MR NGUBANE: But Mr Mkhize, I'm not speaking to a layman here'; I'm speaking to a trained policeman.  Can you answer my question directly: was he a witness or was he not?

DJ MKHIZE: He would have been a witness.

MR NGUBANE: Now when did you learn about the fact that this gentleman was going to be a witness, if you can recall?

DJ MKHIZE: I cannot recall, but what I do know is that after he had implicated Romeo in that incident, Romeo was charged.  My memory doesn't serve me well about when he was charged and when did we know that Nati had been the person to implicate him.  We did not receive instruction to kill him first.  Our prior instruction was to investigate about him, about his activities, what he was up to.  Because it could have been that Nati was doing all these activities because maybe he had a personal tiff with Romeo.  They could have had some conflict, personal or financial, but it may not have been political.  But because we didn't have information about him before about his political activities, I think he was the only person on whom an instruction was given that he should be investigated about who he is; his whereabouts; what he is involved in.  Because we knew very well that Romeo had not stolen any car.

MR NGUBANE: Now in the Supreme Court you were charged not with robbery - that's on pg 2 of the record of the Supreme Court proceedings.  You won't have that.

DJ MKHIZE: No.

MR NGUBANE: You won't have that.  You were charged with that you had committed an unlawful act in that you intentionally and with the aim of assisting accused no 1 who at that time was Romeo to evade justice and that you made a false statement in order to protect accused no 1, and you failed to report the involvement of accused no 1 in respect of the robbery perpetrated on the complainant.  Was that statement correct?

DJ MKHIZE: It was wrong.  Firstly I did not even fabricate an alibi to cover this incident.  This matter was reported to me or I heard of this matter very late because I had been sick for three months.
	Secondly I did not make any statement regarding this matter.  And no investigator has ever come to me to enquire or question me about this matter.  I was very shocked at the trial when I heard that I had also been charged in Romeo's matter.
	I was never involved regarding information.

MR NGUBANE: The first person to speak to you about Nati, was it Romeo Mbambo?

DJ MKHIZE: Yes.  After having been charged he did.

MR NGUBANE: And he was worried about this man.  Is it correct?

DJ MKHIZE: Yes, that is so.

MR NGUBANE: And you also became concerned that one of your members was implicated in this offence.  Is it right?

DJ MKHIZE: Yes, I was worried about that.

MR NGUBANE: And who reported this matter to the people in higher authority, the Inkatha people in high authority?

DJ MKHIZE: I reported.

MR NGUBANE: And you knew that these people were the people who had given you orders to kill, and they were likely to give you orders to kill this man.  Is that right?

DJ MKHIZE: The objective of reporting was to inform them that there was a member of my hit squad who could be arrested.  I was thinking beyond the arrest of Romeo.  I thought that if Romeo gets arrested and maybe he gets electric shocks, he is tortured, it could happen that our activities would be exposed.
	The murder of Gumede was not known, but they only knew about it when Andrew Xele was arrested and when he was in custody he eventually divulged this information.  So it is normal practice that a person can be arrested for one thing, and end up divulging information that had nothing with the case with which he was arrested.
	Therefore I was very concerned that information about these activities could leak, and that was the reason why I reported to my superiors.

MR NGUBANE: But Sir, I take it that you hadn't had a look at the contents of the document relating to this matter.  Is it correct?

DJ MKHIZE: What document are you talking about Sir?

MR NGUBANE: The docket relating to the robbery matter in which Romeo was implicated.  You hadn't perused the content; you didn't know what the statements therein stated.  Is that right?

DJ MKHIZE: I did not have access to the docket.  Because I think it was investigated by the SAP.  But my primary duty was to confirm with Romeo that he was not involved in the theft of the car that he was supposed to have stolen.

MR NGUBANE: And without having a look at the contents of the docket, without knowing what the statements were you immediately concluded that this was an ANC plot to incriminate Romeo, implicate him in this offence.  Is that right?

DJ MKHIZE: I did not conclude that.  But because of the problem that had now arisen, I referred the matter to my superiors because I thought the matter was beyond my control.  Not that I had made conclusions about the case.  As I explained before, the first instruction was to investigate Nati.  And it later eventually emerged that I got an instruction that he should be killed.

MR NGUBANE: Didn't Romeo tell you that Nati Gumede was an ANC member when he first reported this matter to you?