Amnesty Hearings — East London — 1998-04-03

MR NTONGA: You recall saying that to the Judge in the Supreme Court in East London that you were told before reaching Mdantsane, that the struggle is over?

ZUKILE MBAMBO: I remember it sir.

MR NTONGA: Will I be correct to say that that is one of the lies that you told the Court that day?

ZUKILE MBAMBO: It was lies, sir.

ADV SANDI: Sorry Mr Ntonga, sorry.  What benefit were you hoping to secure when you told this particular lie in court?

ZUKILE MBAMBO: The reason for me to lie over that, was to hear my case that me and my Advocate, our case was that I did not go there voluntarily.  I was forced by the other comrades I was moving with, when we were told to go home, and they instead told me to go there and do those things.

MR NTONGA: Isn't that the truth, isn't that really what happened?  You were told not to go and do those things, and you did so on your own, without any instructions from APLA command?

ZUKILE MBAMBO: That is not so Mr Ntonga.

MR NTONGA: Okay.  Let's talk about the application that you submitted to the TRC.  You remember that the first application that you submitted which you said was completed by an Attorney from King, that is the application that was turned down in respect of your confession in East London, do you remember that?

ZUKILE MBAMBO: Sir, I would like to request as you are saying that it is the one that was turned back, I want you to tell me who is the person who instructed the Commission, except myself, that the application ... (tape ends) ...

MR PRIOR: In other words, Mr Ntonga is saying it was refused.

ZUKILE MBAMBO: That is the first time that I hear it sir, he never said that to me.

MR NTONGA: Are you aware that the first application that was made, was refused and you were told about that?

ZUKILE MBAMBO: I agree the first application was refused sir.

MR NTONGA: And it was, do you know the reason why it was refused which was technical?

ZUKILE MBAMBO: Yes sir, I know the reason for its refusal as I was told by Mr Bandazayo.

MR NTONGA: Is it because the acts fell outside of the cut off date of I think the 5th of December 1993, is that so?

MR PRIOR: Sorry it would have been the 15th of December 1993.

MR NTONGA: I accept that.

ZUKILE MBAMBO: Sir, Mr Ntonga, I would like your question to be straight, because now I am going to answer where I am not supposed to give answers.  I am sure you want to say as to whether do I agree that my application as it was turned down, is because things we are talking about at the application, are things that happened after the date of the suspension of the armed struggle, is that what you are saying?
	Okay, please repeat yourself.

MR NTONGA: Please Mr Mbambo, I have made it clear that it was refused because the acts committed were after the cut off date, which was the 15th of December 1993.  Nothing about the armed struggle, the cut off date to make application for amnesty.

MR LAX: Can I just explain to him what that is, the cut off date, I am sure you will probably say it was explained to him in the past, but so that we are all clear about it.
	In the statute of the Truth Commission, the cut off date that was determined as being the date at which all hostilities ended, the date at which the country had begun the transformation, which is a date mentioned in the interim constitution, that date was determined as the 15th of December 1993.
	Sorry, I am going a bit fast, I apologise.

MR PRIOR: Mr Chairman, I don't want to interrupt, was it not the 5th of December?  We have a letter from the Commission which indicate that.

MR LAX: It is not material whether it was the 15th or the 5th, let's just say it was the 5th then, now, carry on listening, because I am going to carry on explaining to you.
	When the amnesty provisions were first set in place, all acts up to the 5th of December, amnesty could have been applied for for those acts.  Do you understand that?
	Now, at a later stage the cut off date was shifted.

ZUKILE MBAMBO: I know that sir, that is why I was talking like that to Mr Ntonga, that is he not making a mistake.  Does he not want to say our application was rejected because the things we were referring to at the application, happened after the 5th of December of 1993, and he said no, that is what I was asking from Mr Ntonga.

MR LAX: Listen, we are going to get bogged down in an argument about nothing.  I think let's just proceed with the question.

MR NTONGA: Thank you Mr Chairman.  So after the date was extended, you had to file a new application for Bahai as well as revive the application for the East London Supreme Court convictions, isn't that so?  Isn't that so?

ZUKILE MBAMBO: Yes, that is so.

MR NTONGA: And that was done by Mr Bandazayo?

ZUKILE MBAMBO: That is so.

MR NTONGA: And the TRC acknowledged that they are now going to hear your application in respect of the conviction in East London, as well as the pending criminal case in Bisho, the Bahai incident, isn't that so?

ZUKILE MBAMBO: I am sorry sir, something did not go correctly here.  We've got the letters from the TRC that said we are going to be told about something that would be done later.
	We had not - our applications had not been made by Mr Bandazayo then.  He came and we told him that we had received letters from the TRC at the time.  He took those letters we had received from the TRC and left with them.  All of us who were Africans from the prison, those letters are indicating that and signed by Mr Alex Borraine, indicate that other things are going to be explained to us later.
	They got to us before Mr Bandazayo came to us in prison, to make applications on our behalf.  I want to apologise for you saying that those letters came after Mr Bandazayo had made those applications on our behalf.  He came and we gave him those letters, and he left with those letters, and we do not know what he did with those letters.

MR NTONGA: Mr Mbambo, I will ask you a simple request.  If you don't understand my question, say so because all you are saying is about the first application, which was turned down on a technicality.
	We have finished that portion, I am asking you that when the cut off date was extended, then, only then, that new application was made for you for the Bahai incident and the incidents in East London were revived, is that not correct?
	After the cut off date had been shifted, had been removed, then new applications to revive the one that has been turned down, and put in a new one for Bahai, was done by Mr Bandazayo, isn't that so?  That is all I am asking.

ZUKILE MBAMBO: I am sorry, Mr Ntonga.  I apologise from the beginning.  I said sir, there is something that is confusing, not said in the beginning, that the papers from the TRC that said our applications had reached the TRC and everything else would be communicated to us, came to us even before Mr Bandazayo had gone to see us in prison to make applications on our behalf.
	Now, sir, I would like you to go on with your questions that you are trying to ask.

MR NTONGA: Is it not correct Mr Mbambo that after you had been advised that the incidents in East London for which you had been convicted, did not fall within the time frame, so your application had been turned down, that(indistinct) in 1997, didn't after the extension of the time limits make new application with Mr Bandazayo, because now you could put in
the incident of the 18, 25, 28 with extension?  Isn't that so?

ZUKILE MBAMBO: That is so sir.  I did that because my application had been rejected and when the time was extended, I then made other applications.

MR NTONGA: And this is the application which is typed, which was submitted for both cases in the Supreme Court, the one which you are serving and the one which is still pending made in May, yes the 25th of May I think Your Worship.

MR PRIOR: It is the 7th of May.

MR NTONGA: The 7th of May.