Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 2000-08-30

MS MOHAMED: Thank you Mr Chairman.  Mr Chairman, with your leave, prior to commencing the application of Mr Mpanza, there is a matter that I would like to address  you on.  If you are aware, there are two other persons involved in this matter, according to Mr Mpanza's application are Mr Mzwake Cleopa Shandu and Mr Sifiso Goodman .
	Mr Chairman, there was a High Court application brought on Monday in the Natal Provincial Division, to have these two applications be joined and recognised as applicants for the purposes of this hearing, that was done pursuant to previous proceedings before the Amnesty Committee, when the matter could not proceed because Mr Malevu and Mr Shandu were not recognised as applicants at that stage.  Given the directions from the previous Committee that heard the matter, we were asked then to follow up on the relevant High Court application.
	The position is that the matter was heard in the NPD on Monday, the 28th of August before Justice Msimang and the Judge found that he is not in a position to decide the issue, and he ordered that the matter be referred to this Amnesty Committee to consider whether the applications of Mr Malevu and Mr Shandu is properly before the Committee.
	Mr Chairman, with your leave, I would like to address you on that basis then, and possibly place the status of their application before you, so that you can make the necessary decision.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Mohamed, the Act stipulates, I think peremptory regulations that applications by each person who seeks amnesty for whatever offence, must firstly make such application on a prescribed form.  I think it is around Section 16 or 17.

MS MOHAMED: Yes, I think it is in Section 18.

CHAIRPERSON: Whatever.  There are other formalities that have to be complied with for an application to be regarded as before a Committee.  Now, we are not in possession of any form purporting to be an application by either Mr Shandu or Malevu.  I don't know if you are in possession of such a document?

MS MOHAMED: No, Mr Chairman, I am not in possession of such a form.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you know whether such forms were completed?

MS MOHAMED: On the instructions I have received, sorry, I am going to use the word applicants just for easy reference, that both of them have completed their forms.  Mr Malevu at that time, on completion of the form, around May 1997, was at Westville prison and the form was completed and then duly sent to the prison authorities for onward transmission to the TRC.  Mr Shandu at that stage was at Waterval prison, and he says he did likewise, where the form was sent to prison authorities for forward transmission.
	It is also my instructions that they received no further communication from the TRC about the outcome of that application.   At some stage, Mr Chairman, just to clarify the position ...

CHAIRPERSON: Have you got a copy of the papers that were served on the Court?

MS MOHAMED: Yes, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Could I have a copy of that, please.

MR PANDAY: Mr Chairman, if you seek to use mine, because I am not involved in this problem, so it would be easier for you, it is just a fax copy that was sent to my office.

JUDGE POTGIETER: What the other applicant, is it Mr Malevu?

MS MOHAMED: Yes.

JUDGE POTGIETER: Where did he submit his application to, which prison was it?

MS MOHAMED: Mr Malevu was at Westville prison.

JUDGE POTGIETER: Westville?  And he also completed a form and handed it to the authorities at the prison?

MS MOHAMED: Yes.  And Mr Shandu was at Waterval.

JUDGE POTGIETER: He was at Waterval prison you said?

MS MOHAMED: Yes.

JUDGE POTGIETER: Have you got a date roughly when all of this happened?

MS MOHAMED: Around May 1997.

JUDGE POTGIETER: In respect of both Shandu and Malevu?

MS MOHAMED: Yes.  Mr Chairman, if I may with your leave, I want to explain the situation to you.
	After these forms, according to Mr Malevu and Shandu, after they had sent it to the prison authorities, they received no further word from the TRC about their application per se.  What had happened was around July 1999, the TRC Investigator, Mr Joshua Cele called at Westville prison to speak to Mr Malevu, I think at that stage he had just been cited as an implicated party in Mr Mpanza's matter.  During the course of the consultation an affidavit was drawn up which Mr Malevu had signed and I am aware that that affidavit is included in the bundle.

MR LAX: Is that at 4 to 10 of the papers?

MS MOHAMED: Yes, Mr Lax.  And likewise, Ms Sheila Mkhize and Mr Joshua Cele again consulted with Mr Shandu at Waterval prison and a similar affidavit was then drawn up, and that is also included in the bundle, on page 11 to 16.

MR LAX: Those affidavits though were for the purposes of their implication in Mr Mpanza's application?

MS MOHAMED: That is correct Mr Lax.  What had happened at that stage was in these affidavits, both Mr Shandu and Mr Malevu in the relevant paragraphs, if I may point you to that ...

JUDGE POTGIETER: Where is that?

MS MOHAMED: Mr Malevu's affidavit, for ease of reference I am going to refer to the typed version so that we can locate it quicker, on page 4.

JUDGE POTGIETER: Yes, what paragraph?

MS MOHAMED: Sorry, on page 5, paragraph 10, this is dealing with the status of their application, page 5, paragraph 10, the second sentence of paragraph 10, Mr Malevu says
"... in addition I wish to state that when the Act of the Truth Commission came into effect, I and Ziba and Mzwake  Shandu gathered and applied for amnesty unilaterally in one form, which was signed by Ziba.  This was through lack of knowledge that individuals should submit his own forms, and I am of the opinion that I am being considered as one of the applicants.  This is all that I wish to state."

MR LAX: With the greatest of respect, how can that be in line with what you have just told us?

MS MOHAMED: Mr Lax ...

MR LAX: Let me just finish.   You have just told us that they individually applied at Westville and Waterval in May 1997, this says all three of them were together and they all made one application in one form?  Those are two totally different versions?

MS MOHAMED: Yes, Mr Lax, if I may, I do apologise.

JUDGE POTGIETER: Take us to the other affidavit as well, and just, you were busy pointing out where these things appear, and I accept you will then explain?

MS MOHAMED: Yes.

JUDGE POTGIETER: Yes.  And Mr Shandu's affidavit, the typed form on page 11.

JUDGE POTGIETER: Paragraph?

MS MOHAMED: Paragraph 2.  That is the typed version, Mr Shandu says
"... according to my knowledge, I also applied for amnesty together with Sifiso Malevu and Ziba Mpanza, co-perpetrators of the robbery, we were convicted for.  Although I did not sign any form, I remember that we included our names and Ziba had signed the application form.  It was between early 1997 and late 1996."

JUDGE POTGIETER: Thank you.