Amnesty Hearings — Bloemfontein — 1997-05-15

JUDGE WILSON: The applicant in this matter is Mohanatse Stephen Motsamai, his application is numbered 4031/96.  Now we have before us in this matter the application which appears to have been completed by the applicant. It is hand-written and it is dated the 8th of November 1996 at Bloemfontein.  It was attested to on the 11th of March 1997. We understand that it was thereafter (indistinct - not speaking into microphone) to the investigative unit with the request that he forward it to Cape Town, and that that was done.  Is this being interpreted for the benefit of Mr Motsamai?

MS THABETHA: That is correct, Mr Chairman.

JUDGE WILSON: Very well.  We then have the next document, is a declaration signed by the applicant on the 24th of March 1997, at which he says he will accord to do so, he is prepared to appear at a public hearing.  The next page is details of person making statement and there are details, as I understand it, of the applicant.  Save for one, I don't know who filled in the form. Where the question is "home language", the answer is SAP Internal Security.   I don't know if they have some private language, but he says at the bottom that he is going to tell - he is not going to tell the Commission about what happened to him, but he is going to tell the Commission about what happened to someone else, as I understand the circling.  There is then a document described as a brief description of the violation of human rights.  That is signed by him on the 24th of March, as I understand it, that was the statement he made to the TRC, with a view to his appearing at a public hearing.
	Annexed thereto is a further document, headed Annexure B, the reasons for this application the following.  
I have no idea where that Annexure B comes from or what the relevance of it is, and would be obliged if we could be told.

MS THABETHA: I did enquire from Mr Mthembu, who I hand over now to, to explain the relevance of it, if there is any.

MR MTHEMBU: Mr Chair, at some time in April or so I was phoned by Ms Thabetha, who said she would like to go and see a copy of Annexure B.  In effect, Annexure B refers to an application made by Mr Motsamai to the SAPS head office in Pretoria for legal assistance.  Annexure A thereof
would have been a declaration that Mr Motsamai has to sign that in the event that he doesn't get amnesty, that he must reimburse the SAPS for the moneys that they shall disburse as legal fees.  The Annexure B was then a brief summary of the evidence that he would have led in the Committee.

JUDGE WILSON: So that Annexure B has nothing to do with us, it was prepared for submission to the SAPS?

MR MTHEMBU: Correct, Mr Chairman.

JUDGE WILSON: So the only application before us, is an application for amnesty in respect of the crime of murder, in Melck Street, Bloemfontein.

MS THABETHA: Mr Chair, as I understood it, Annexure B was prepared not for our purposes, but it is evident it was going to be led in front of the Committee members.

JUDGE WILSON: Maybe evidence, but he has not applied for amnesty in respect of those matters. There is an application for amnesty before us, which clearly says what he has applied amnesty for.

UNKNOWN: Mr Chair, my instructions are that Annexure B as it stands, was Annexure B to an application for funding by the police.  That Annexure B was also used for purposes of the application.

JUDGE WILSON: It is not referred to in the application.  Have you got his application for amnesty before you?

UNKNOWN: I have.

JUDGE WILSON: It is quite clear, isn't it, it does not relate to any other offences.  Paragraph 9(a), he was asked to furnish sufficient particulars of acts, omissions, offences, in respect of which amnesty is sought.  There is one act only: murder.  Correct?

UNKNOWN: That is correct, Mr Chairman.  However, Mr Chair, I don't understand why the form was filled in that fashion. However, it is clear that he intended applying for these acts.

JUDGE WILSON: There is no such - it is by no means clear that he intended to apply at that stage for any other acts.

UNKNOWN: Mr Chair, I am saying that as the papers stand before you at present, it is clear that the applicant intended, in terms of applying for this act.

JUDGE WILSON: Which act.

UNKNOWN: If you look at Annexure B, it says ...

JUDGE WILSON: Annexure B was prepared for some other purpose.

UNKNOWN: But have a look ...

JUDGE WILSON: There is nothing.  There is no notification by the applicant or on his behalf that he intends to apply for amnesty in respect of those, nor is
(END OF TAPE 1 - DAY 4 - SIDE B) (TAPE 2 - DAY 4 - SIDE A)

JUDGE WILSON: ... to hear applications for amnesty, for people who suddenly get up and say well, I am going to apply for amnesty for all these acts now.  There was a cut-off date which terminated.

UNKNOWN: Mr Chair, this document was not with the TRC before the cut-off date and I was saying to Mr Chair, if you look at Annexure B, it says at the top the reasons for this application are the following. Now this application refers to the application for amnesty and then a lot of offences there or incidents are referred to, which are clearly not murder or limited to murder or anywhere has any relationship with the murder that is referred to at 9(a).  If Mr Chairperson ... (intervention).

JUDGE WILSON: Have you read Annexure B?  Is there a single word in Annexure B about any act having been committed for a political objective?  As is required in an application for amnesty?

UNKNOWN: Mr Chair, the basis of the application is that these things are committed by the applicant, whilst he was a policeman during the course and scope of his duties as a policeman.

JUDGE WILSON: He doesn't say that in Annexure B.

UNKNOWN: Mr Chair, he does not say that, but if one has regard to the application in its entirety, one should be satisfied that ostensibly Mr Motsamai is applying for amnesty.

JUDGE WILSON: He is not saying that.  The Act is quite clear, if you look at Section 18, that any person who wishes to apply for amnesty in respect of any act or omission, on the grounds that it is an act associated with a political objective, shall submit an application to the Commission in the prescribed form.   You have - he has submitted an application in respect of murder in the prescribed form.  From somewhere, I think Annexure A it appears,  where he details a lot of offences he committed.  As I read them he doesn't say any word that he was ordered to commit them, that they were committed for any political purpose.  Was this accepted by the Committee, by the staff in Cape Town as being an application for amnesty?

MS THABETHA: Yes, it was, Chairperson.

JUDGE WILSON: On what possible basis?

MS THABETHA: Can the Chairperson give me an opportunity to explain what ...

JUDGE WILSON: Yes, I would like a full explanation as to why we are subjected to this.