Amnesty Hearings — Bloemfontein — 1997-03-27

JUDGE WILSON: Mr Mpshe, we were told at the very beginning that the application was in respect of amnesty for the conviction of murder, culpable homicide and defeating the
ends of justice.  You must have known from that that it 
related to some incident apart from this one incident where he was convicted of culpable homicide.  Why did you not raise the difficulty then?

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Mr Chairman, if the Chair will recall in chambers, Mr Chairman ...(intervention)

JUDGE WILSON: I am not interested in chambers, I am interested in what happened at this hearing.  We were told at the commencement of the hearing that the application was for amnesty in respect of culpable homicide on the 15th of June 1990, murder on the second of January 1991 on the farm Beltren and defeating the ends of justice, were we not?  We were told that, yes, when he started giving his evidence, were we not Mr Mpshe?

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: I will accept that we were told, Mr Chairman.

JUDGE WILSON: Well, why did you not raise your difficulty then?

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: I will, I will withdraw my objection, Mr Chairman, but I want to, I just want to put on record that the policemen who are going to be implicated here, Mr Chairman, mentioned in this, will not be here to hear this evidence.

JUDGE WILSON: Well, why didn't you ...(intervention)

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Mr Chairman ...(intervention)

JUDGE WILSON: ... not raise that problem ...(intervention)

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Mr Chairman ...(intervention)

JUDGE WILSON: ... then.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Mr Chairman, Mr Chairman, I may not have heard this, but I laboured on the agreement reached between myself and my learned friend which agreement was conveyed to your good selves in chambers that the matters wherein a various
number of policemen are involved will not be heard, Mr 
Chairman, and that is when the Chair in chambers said, are we now separating the, the acts and that was agreed upon.  I have been belabouring on that agreement, Mr Chairman.  That is why I come in when this type of evidence is to be led, but if ...

JUDGE WILSON: Mr Mpshe.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: ... but if, if the Chair, Mr Chairman, feels that I am out of order, allow myself to keep quiet and let the evidence be led, but I am referring specifically to the agreement reached which is known by the Chair and the Committee members.

JUDGE WILSON: Yes, I ...

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Thank you Mr Chairman.

JUDGE WILSON: ... understood the agreement was in respect of the cases we were told about.  Mr Mpshe, if this matter was, the whole of this matter was supposed to be heard at this hearing, was it not?  You told us repeatedly ...

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Mr Chairman ...

JUDGE WILSON: ... we could dispose of this matter here at Bloemfontein.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Mr Chairman, let it be so, Mr Chairman, I do not want to enter ...(intervention)

JUDGE WILSON: In that case ...(intervention)

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: ... into other areas, Mr Chairman ...(intervention)

JUDGE WILSON: ... why did you not notify the policemen who were named?

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Mr Chairman, the report is going to come, it is available, they are going to fetch it, about the people who are implicated, Mr Chairman.  It is available, but on the basis of the agreement ...(intervention)

JUDGE WILSON: Forget the agreement, Mr Mpshe, I am asking
you why, when this matter was set down, proper steps were not taken to notify the persons implicated.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Mr Chairman ...(intervention)

JUDGE WILSON: I am sick and tired of this happening.  At hearing after hearing we find that people have not been notified.  Why were these policemen not notified if this matter was to be heard here?

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: I wish the Chair could give me an opportunity to explain.  Give me the chance to explain, Mr Chairman.

JUDGE WILSON: Try to.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Thank you.  Mr Chairman, I have just indicated a second ago that a report from the IU will be made available to this Committee, Mr Chairman, and that the basis on which I agreed that we do this, Mr Chairman, was that the, I was told that the only person implicated is Colonel Voigt in the matter which is going to be heard, but as the Chair has already indicated, I withdraw that objection, that the matter go on, Mr Chairman, but we should not be taken to task because I was acting here on the agreement reached.

JUDGE WILSON: Mr Mpshe, did you give us these papers to read, 280 odd pages, at a time when you did not know if notification had been given to interested parties?

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Did, did not know the notification was not given, Mr Chairman, was never my ways ...(intervention)

JUDGE WILSON: Well, why did you not find out?

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: ...in this hearing Mr Chairman.  I said, Mr Chairman, the report will be tabled before you today.  May we, for the sake of this, Mr Chairman, ...(intervention)

JUDGE WILSON: Why was this not found out before the hearing commenced?  I do not want reports tabled today, the last day of the hearing.  Before the matter was set down, why did you not satisfy yourself that proper notice had been given to implicated parties?

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Mr Chairman, I do not want to enter into arguments that will be of an emotional nature, Mr Chairman.  May I, may I, with respect, withdraw the objection and let the applicant go on.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Before you withdraw the objection I think something must be cleared.  Mr Mpshe, I told you last time, when problems of this nature arose, I told you that if there are problems, you must decide whether you want to accept, personally, the problems that emanate from the office of the Amnesty Committee.  If you do not speak them out and air them and make everybody understand that there are problems, the Amnesty Committee has got problems, if you do not want to speak out, you will end up having to shoulder the responsibility for everything that comes out of here.  I told you that, but apart from that, can I just clarify with your colleague, Mr Mama, Mr ...

MR MADASA: Madasa.

JUDGE MGOEPE: When we were in chambers, when you spoke about a matter or matters which, I am not so sure now what you said, when you said that the matter or matters were or let me put it this way - did you say a particular matter was totally separable from the rest or did you speak of two, three matters which were totally separable from the rest?

MR MADASA: Mr Commissioner I said the information which relates to the application which we are now dealing with, I am sorry the information that does not relate to the application that we are now dealing with, we will leave that out.

JUDGE MGOEPE: I am, did you, tell me if I am wrong.  Did you not say that we will hear a particular matter and that matter was totally separable from other matters?

MR MADASA: I get your question, yes, I said that.

JUDGE MGOEPE: So, Mr Mpshe, is correct to say that in chambers you said to us only one matter was going to be heard?

MR MADASA: That is correct.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Why are you wanting to hear more than one matter which is something totally different from the agreement that Mr Mpshe is referring to?

MR MADASA: In fact, Mr Commissioner, before the discussion between Mr Chair and Mr Mpshe, I was about to bring to the attention of the applicant, because I also discussed this with him during consultation this morning after I had met you, that he should leave out the information we agreed between ourselves, that he should leave out and he has made markings on his notes about that information.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Now, why do you not come to the assistance of your colleague and explain to us there and say to us Mr Mpshe is correct to say that in chambers we agreed that only one matter would be heard?

MR MADASA: Mr Commissioner, I am sure you will appreciate because of the nature of the debate between Mr Mpshe and him, I was not able to come in there and then.