bitter-aloe/trc-testimonies huggingface dataset:
Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — UNKNOWN

CHAIRPERSON: I place no restraint on your in that regard. In the meanwhile people whose names have been mentioned duringthe course of these proceedings and who have not received noticeor who have not received adequate notice about that fact, I'veno doubt steps are already afoot to put that right.   PerhapsMr Mpshe will seek assistance to see that that is done timeously.

MR CURRIN: : That would obviously include members of theState Security Council?

CHAIRPERSON: I'm talking about names that have been mentioned,I'm not talking about any particular name, I'm talking about peoplewhose names have been mentioned in
8.2 these /...
MR CURRIN 673 ADDRESS
these proceedings.

MR CURRIN: : Thank you Sir.

JUDGE WILSON: : Could I add to that, Mr Currin if you aregoing to call witnesses whom you know are going to name persons,it would be appreciated if you could inform Mr Mpshe timeouslyso he can then take the necessary steps to notify those peoplethat they are going to be named because he obviously cannot anticipatewhat your witnesses are going to say.   If you know that namesare going to be mentioned, if you inform Mr Mpshe he will takethe necessary steps.

MR CURRIN: : We will do that Sir, thank you.
DISCUSSION BY MR MPSHE - NO MICROPHONE

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: : ...indicate what they want me to do, whetherto subpoena them or just to inform them that they are being implicated.  Thank you Mr Chairman that is all.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well, this meeting comes to an end forthe time being.   I adjourn these proceedings until 24 February,1997.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS UNTIL 24 FEBRUARY 1997.
Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — 1998-05-19

NEO POTSANE: I can think of one example in the case of BRIAN MITCHELL who actually went to attack a house of the ANC. His intention being to bolster the IFP and he actually went to a wrong house. A house that of IFP supporters and in that case he actually killed all the people, women and children in that house who were innocent victims. And when he applied for amnesty at a later stage he was granted amnesty.

MR CURRIN: So in your view if the people who are here today being represented were not part of a group that were intending to attack then you believe that shouldn't impact on your application?

NEO POTSANE: That is correct.

MR CURRIN: Would you like to say anything while you are here today to the victims who are present in regard to the incident that happened?

NEO POTSANE: Well I would like to say I regret the loss of life particularly to those who lost their next-of-kins, those who got injured and I would like to place on this Committee that I am very, very sorry that my actions on that day has got this lot of suffering to the people.

MR CURRIN: Thank you. I have no further questions of this witness.

MR CURRIN: .

CHAIRPERSON: This may be an appropriate time to adjourn for the day and we will resume at nine thirty tomorrow morning. The Committee will now adjourn and resume at nine thirty tomorrow morning Mr Currin.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — 1997-04-07

ADV MALAN: Mr Chairman, apart from saying that the action was through and through of a political motivation, I mean if any other person had been involved, if a White person had walked passed it wouldn't have happened, and that had been the basis of what was going on in his mind, he had the courage to do so at that stage, then naturally it had no ripple effect on the political developments at that stage.

SISI KHAMPEPE: ;	I appreciate your difficulty, I think you can proceed.

ADV MALAN: That is as far as I will and can carry the argument.

JUDGE WILSON: Do you know how he pleaded in his trial?

ADV MALAN: Mr Chairman, he pleaded not guilty according to what he informed us, because he had argued that he had
been affected to such an extend by the alcohol, that his actions couldn't have been controlled, but that after a witness or two had testified, he changed his plea to guilty.

JUDGE WILSON: Thank you.  Mr Black, have you got anything you wish to add?

MR BLACK: Mr Chairman, except to submit in my assessment of the evidence, that Mr Vosloo the applicant, has not satisfied the requirements of the Act for a number of reasons.  One of which is he has, my submission is that the act appears to have been committed for extreme racist motives as opposed to political, achieving a political objective and importantly the act and the gravity of the act is out of all proportion to whatever objective he hoped to achieve.
	The proportionality portion is not also complied with.  Thank you.

JUDGE WILSON: We will take time to arrive to our decision.  That completes the roll for today, does it?

ADV MALAN: That is so Mr Chairman.
Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — 1997-04-09

JUDGE WILSON: I must once again apologise to the members of the public and others for the fact that this hearing did not commence at nine o'clock as it was supposed to.  The initial cause of the delay was once again the late arrival of the applicants, through no fault of their own.   What was the cause of the delay thereafter I do not know.  But I am sorry for the members of the public who have had to sit here waiting.  Mr Black?

MR BLACK: Yes, Mr Chairman, the first matter which I wish to mention, is the matter which was set down for hearing for tomorrow, but after various discussions with all parties involved, we have agreed that the matter be removed from the roll.  There are two applications in effect.  It is the application of J Wheeler, application number 2084/96 and the application of Mr C Pyper, application number 5179/97.

JUDGE WILSON: As I understand it, the reason for the removal is due to the delay in an amendment to the Act and not to any fault of the parties.

MR BLACK: That is so, thank you.

JUDGE WILSON: Very well, the matter is removed?

MR BLACK: Okay.

JUDGE WILSON: The matter is removed from the roll.  I trust all the parties have been notified and they will not - including the prison authorities, so no one will be put to any inconvenience tomorrow.

MR BLACK: I haven't got hold of the prison authorities yet, but the legal representatives of the parties and the victims have all been notified.

JUDGE WILSON: The applicant may not object to being taken on a drive round Johannesburg, so if you don't get in touch with him it won't really cause him any great prejudice.

ADV DE JAGER: Mr Black, the reason is that the cut-off date hasn't been extended yet.

MR BLACK: That is so.  That is so.

ADV DE JAGER: (Microphone not switched on) ... the Constitution and the Act has got to be amended and we are almost nearing the 10th of May so this should be done as an urgent matter.

MR BLACK: I have spoken to the Constitutional Development Department.  I am told that they are in the process of preparing a proposal for an amendment to the Constitution, and that amendment was - the proposal must still be approved of by the Minister and the Cabinet and thereafter debated in Parliament.
Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — 1998-05-06

MR POOE: As it pleases you Chairperson.  There is one matter of a purely administrative nature and which I have mentioned to Mr Steenkamp yesterday and that is that we have an applicant who by the looks of things, ought not to be here.
	And I have indicated to Mr Steenkamp that perhaps that should be disposed of and he should be led to go subject to him wanting to remain to listen in because it seems like his matter ought to come up at a later date.  It's not one of the matters which is on the list of the 13 matters which are before you.  
	And that is the applicant, Simon Mshongo who, although he applies for an attack on the Wits command, it is not the Wits command which is now being considered by the Committee, it's another Wits command in 1988, a completely unrelated and separate incident. 
	I have indicated to Mr Steenkamp that I will endeavour before he disappears back to work, to obtain just a short affidavit placing the matter properly before you so that you can consider it.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, well then perhaps you want to deal with this late Mr Steenkamp, you and Mr Pooe and then you inform the Committee whatever is decided there.

MR STEENKAMP: I can do that Mr Chairman.  I can confirm with Mr Pooe saying that that was the discussion.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, if that's confirmed, I don't know, I suppose the thing to do would then just to remove this application from the role, would that be correct?

MR STEENKAMP: Yes, that's the suggestion regarding Mshlango.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, well then if that is the case, if it's not one of the ones that we are here to be considering then is it not possibly to deal with it now seeing that it is before us.

MR STEENKAMP: Yes, I would suggest it can be removed from the roll subject to the affidavit that will be handed in at this hearing regarding Mr Mshlango.  I have no objections that the application be removed immediately from the roll if there's no other objections.

CHAIRPERSON: But if it can be dealt with here it might be a lot easier than having another separate hearing for it.  So perhaps I'll give you and Pooe an opportunity to discuss it with each other
and you can decide which is the best way.  I'd rather than make a quick decision now and then perhaps regret it later.  So if you can inform us tomorrow morning perhaps?

MR POOE: If it pleases you that way Chairperson, yes, it appears like it can be very quickly disposed of.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, because if it can be dealt with here and is convenient but it depends on notices going out to interested people, implicated persons etc., but if one can take a look at the logistics, if it's possible that we can do it, if not then we'll have to just remove it and have it at a later time.
Amnesty Hearings — Kimberley — 2000-02-04

MR SMITH: That is all, thank you Mr Chairman.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR SMITH

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Smith.  Mr du Plessis, any re-examination?

MR DU PLESSIS: One or two questions Mr Chairman.

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Mkosana, were you part of the planning concerning the deployment prior to the 7th of September 1992 at the H.Q.?

VAKELE ARCHIBALD MKOSANA: Yes.

MR DU PLESSIS: Were you also part of the group that instructed or convened the Board of Inquiry by Mr Skrube or did you only hear that the Board of Inquiry would be instructed?

VAKELE ARCHIBALD MKOSANA: No, I was not part of the Board of Inquiry, I was also making a statement to the Board.

MR DU PLESSIS: I've got no further re-examination.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR DU PLESSIS

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr du Plessis.  Yes, Mr Mkosana, thank you, you are excused.
WITNESS EXCUSED

CHAIRPERSON: We will take the tea adjournment at this stage.  We'll adjourn for 15 minutes.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION

CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mr du Plessis, I assume that would have been the case for Mr Mkosana?

MR DU PLESSIS: As the Committee pleases, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  Yes Mr Nompozolo, do you want to lead the evidence of Mr Gonya?

MR NOMPOZOLO: That is correct, Mr Chairman.
Amnesty Hearings — Klerksdorp — 1999-05-10

CHAIRPERSON: Good afternoon everybody.  We will now commence with the second application, namely that of Messrs P J Rudolph and E N Terre'blanche.  This morning I did introduce the Panel to you but I will do it again seeing that we are starting a new hearing.  On my left is Advocate Bosman, a Member of the Amnesty Committee and she is from the Cape.  On my left is Advocate Ntsiki Sandi also a Member of the Amnesty Committee.  He is from East London.  I am Selwyn Miller, I am a judge of the High Court from the Eastern Cape attached to the Transkei Division thereof.
CHAIRPERSON EXPLAINS TRANSLATION EQUIPMENT

CHAIRPERSON: I would just like to ask the persons to put themselves on record.  Mr Rudolph and Mr Terre'blanche, you appear on behalf of yourselves, is that correct?

MR TERRE'BLANCHE AND MR RUDOLPH: That's correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Olivier?

MR OLIVIER: I am appearing on behalf of the Van Jaarsveld Family, Mr Chairperson.

MS PATEL: Thank you Honourable Chairperson, Ramula Patel, Leader of Evidence.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Rudolph, Mr Terre'blanche, I don't know what order you are going to start with, who is going to start?

MR TERRE'BLANCHE: Mr Chairperson, Your Honour and Honourable judges, I think it is of real importance that after a discussion that I had with Mr Rudolph in order to facilitate the matter for speedy completion, that Mr Rudolph should go first.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, well, the choice is yours.  Mr Rudolph are you going to give evidence?

ADV BOSMAN: Mr Rudolph, can you please stand, do you prefer to take the oath.

P J RUDOLPH: (confirms)

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, you may be seated.  Yes, Mr Rudolph?
Amnesty Hearings — Klerksdorp — 1999-05-10

MR TERRE'BLANCHE: Mr Chairperson, what I have feared, I notice in nearly each and every paragraph of this statement, that is to say the least, a cold blooded attack on my dignity, my person, which has purposefully been compiled so that the press should carry this information.  And then the right is reserved of the family that the accusations and the statements which are made about me that I cannot defend myself by means of cross-examination to say the least.  Will I allow this statement to be read under my own protest, but then at least I expect that after this statement I am allowed to reply and that I can put my case in which I am being insulted.
   I cannot see that why such a great deal is being made of Reconciliation and Truth in this piece, that this statement can bring about reconciliation.  And it is my submission that you, the Committee, are being used in this instance by the family to criticise me and to launch attacks on me which are not being tested and if not you, but in which the public media can send out an untested attack on me to the world.  It is then my request that after - if this statement is allowed to be read, that I be allowed at least to reply, otherwise I have been brought before this Committee to be criticised without being allowed to defend myself and I do not think that this is the task, and I say this with the greatest piety and respect, that it is a task that opportunities be created for criticism to be expressed in the presence of you, the Judges and the audience as well as the media.  I find this very strange.  I thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Terre'blanche.   Mr Terre'blanche, you will certainly be given an opportunity to reply to any statement made.  Mr Olivier, this statement, is it defamatory in any way?

MR OLIVIER: It is not defamatory as far as we are concerned, it merely states the views of the family.  We have no objection to any reply by Mr Terre'blanche.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you.  Then the statement may be read to the record and you will be given an opportunity to reply.

MR VAN JAARSVELD READS STATEMENT INTO RECORD: Mr Chairman, thank you very much for the opportunity given to me.  As provided for in the Act on the Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation, our ...
TAPE FAULTY - NO FURTHER RECORDING IN THAT REGARD
Amnesty Hearings — Klerksdorp — 1999-05-10

MR OLIVIER: It merely restates, Chairman, the position that Professor van Jaarsveld held at the time, which is obviously the opposing view of Mr Terre'blanche.  It does not really take issue with him on that, but focuses mainly on the effects that it had on this family and what happened following that particular action, therefore explaining their views as victims.

CHAIRPERSON: And just to confirm, your client just wishes to make a statement?
TAPE FAULTY - NO FURTHER RECORDING REGARDING THIS MATTER
Amnesty Hearings — Klerksdorp — 1999-05-11

CHAIRPERSON: You can continue.
MR RUDOLPH
"The raising of the Transvaal "Vierkleur" at the, and the bomb attack at Melrose House in Pretoria where the Peace of Vereeniging was concluded in 1902.  On this terrain the Vierkleur was raised as well.  As a result of this and other attacks, the applicant on the 17th of September 1990, was arrested and charged with the theft of weapons, sabotage and other offences.
		With the agreement between the then government and the ANC, the applicant was also set free on the 18th of March 1991.  After his release, the applicant had a post as Secretary-General at the AWB. In that capacity he became involved in the events at Ventersdorp for which he is now requesting amnesty.
		The political objectives was that in order to achieve political stability, the reinstatement of the former Boer Republics as sovereign independent countries within Southern Africa, to be acknowledged as such.  The African's further viewpoint was that the independence of the Boer Republics could be achieved in two ways, namely by negotiating and by fighting for it.  The previous applicant pledged himself to the negotiation process and this was still his point of departure.
		With this point of departure, the applicant and others, during August 1991, they decided to attend the public political meeting of the former State President, Mr FW de Klerk at Ventersdorp and to put questions to him regarding the independence of the Boer Republics' political prisoners who were still in prison and who are still there, squatters on Boer land which was a matter of actual importance and interest at Ventersdorp at that stage.
		It has to be noted that at the time of the Ventersdorp event he was a resident of Ventersdorp."

CHAIRPERSON: You said that you decided to attend a public meeting of the State President, was the meeting advertised as a public meeting?

MR RUDOLPH: Your Honour, I am not following you.  What advertisement are you referring to, our attendance there or what?

CHAIRPERSON: No, you said - I just want to get this matter cleared up, you said that in August 1991 you decided to attend a public meeting of the State President, which was to be held in Ventersdorp.  Now we have also heard earlier that that meeting was then said to be a meeting just for members of the National Party etc.  Now this question of whether it was a public meeting or a closed meeting for a limited class of persons, namely members of the party, you have said it was a public meeting, why do you say it was a public meeting, was it advertised as such?  This is all I just want to know at this stage.

MR RUDOLPH: Yes, the meeting was advertised as a public meeting.  It was advertised by means of placards and posters on the lamp posts.  Posters were placed on notice boards and even in the media.
Amnesty Hearings — Messina — 2000-07-03

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, as said earlier when this matter was brought to our attention this morning as members of the Panel looked into this and we're certainly of the view that the way it's set out in the application form where it was - we considered it to be an application.  I mean otherwise why mention it together with these other applications?  He states that he came, visited the operatives and that sort of thing, but it's up to Mr Kasrils, we - it's regarded by the Committee as being an application which means that two routes can be followed now.  We can merely remove it from the roll, his application and proceed with the application of the other three gentlemen.  From what you've said, you won't be withdrawing it because you don't consider it to be an application, so perhaps the best route to follow would be then just to withdraw it, to remove it from the roll of this hearing.

MR KOOPEDI: I would have no problem with that Chairperson and I must say that the other three applicants are ready to proceed.  Thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.  So we'll remove the application of Mr Kasrils from the roll of this hearing.  Yes, Mr Koopedi.

MR KOOPEDI: Chairperson, the three applicants before you are the other three, other than Mr Kasrils, as listed in the bundle of documents or on the schedule.  We propose with leave of this Honourable Committee to change their order of appearance.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, certainly.  You can call them in any order you wish Mr Koopedi.

MR KOOPEDI: Thank you Chairperson.  The first applicant that will be heard would be number three in the list who is Mzondelele Euthlid Nondula and the second one would be your number four, Jabulani Sydney Mbuli and the third one would be the number two, Mthetheleli Zephania Mncube.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR KOOPEDI: Mr Nondula is before you Chairperson and ready to be sworn in.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
Amnesty Hearings — Messina — 2000-07-05

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, now the APLA called off the armed struggle on 16th of January 1994 and it was big news.  A formal cessation of the armed struggle on the 16th of January.  You were living in Alexandra at the time.  You were reading newspapers, you were fully acquainted with the activities of APLA and PAC, why did you continue to operate after the cessation of the struggle by APLA?

ZWELI ABSOLON MHLONGO: As I have mentioned initially that some of the things that led to political differences were among those and we were coming from the exile and we had suffered a lot there and we were trained and we were told of what to do when we come to South Africa and we knew very well in our minds that when we come to South Africa, we are supposed to fight the white people and we were not satisfied by that suspension of the arms struggle, that is why we left East Rand, because we didn't want anyone to disturb us, to tell us that we should put down arms, that is why we decided to come to Northern Province to continue with our operations and we were not the only unit who was against this idea of suspending the arms struggle.

CHAIRPERSON: So when you committed these offences against the Pypers and the Bouwer family, you were then not acting on behalf of APLA and in the furtherance of its objectives.

ZWELI ABSOLON MHLONGO: We were doing it for APLA because Moses would report to Letlapa Mphahlele and Letlapa Mphahlele was an APLA member and PAC member at the same time.  They were also the people who were supporting us, that is why he was in a position to give Morapapa firearms to continue with our operations.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you not find it unusual that you in your operations were using a car that could be traced to one of your members, in other words a legal car, a car that was registered in one of your member's names?

ZWELI ABSOLON MHLONGO: No, we did not see that as a problem because when this car - when the car failed to start, leaving it there we had a plan and we told the owner of the car as to what to do in order for him to get his car.  We did not have a problem using a legal car.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you.  Mr Mbandazayo, any questions arising out of questions that have been put by the Panel?

MR MBANDAZAYO: None, Chairperson.
NO RE-EXAMINATION BY MR MBANDAZAYO

CHAIRPERSON: Mr van der Heever, any questions arising out of questions that have been put?

MR VAN DER HEEVER: None, Mr Chairperson.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR VAN DER HEEVER

CHAIRPERSON: I'll say that's none, because you couldn't get your button on.  Ms Mtanga, any questions arising?

MS MTANGA: No questions, Chairperson.
NO QUESTIONS BY MS MTANGA

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mhlongo, thank you, that concludes your testimony, you may stand down now.
WITNESS EXCUSED

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mbandazayo.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Chairperson, I'm calling the second applicant to the witness stand.
Amnesty Hearings — Messina — 2000-07-05

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  I would, before we adjourn then, just like to thank all the people concerned who made our hearings here in Messina possible.  I'd also like to say that for some of us it was the first time in Messina and we found it to be a very pleasant place.  I'd like to thank the owners of this magnificent hall for allowing us to use it as a venue.  It's a very nice venue.  I'd like to thank the interpreters for their long and hard task of keeping up with everything that is said.  Thank you very much.  With the media people, with the caterers who have spoiled us and with the witness protection people and the security people and the Correctional Services people who had to travel a long way to get here, although there was some mix up about that, but thank you everybody for making our hearings possible.  If I've omitted a name, it's without intention, but I won't intentionally omit to mention the names of Mr Japhta our Logistics Officer and Mrs Pollock our Secretary, for assisting us as well.  Thank you and also Mr Bouwer, we appreciate the fact that you have come here today and you obviously have our deepest sympathies about this tragic incident, the loss of your parents and also your own personal loss and I'm sure it must have taken a lot of courage to come here and that is appreciated.  Thank you.
	Thank you very much.  We will then adjourn now.
HEARING ADJOURNS
Amnesty Hearings — Middelburg — 2000-05-08

MS MTANGA: Yes Chairperson, I can attend to the request for the prisoners to be here but it's going be impossible for us to arrange for the victims because most of them are in rural areas and they don't have telephone numbers so it's impossible for us to supervise their movements.  We won't know exactly what time they'll be here if they are coming at all.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.  Yes very well, we will see how the matter develops.  But in any event, at this stage then we will adjourn the Phasha applications until Wednesday morning when we will reconvene at 9 o'clock in this venue.

CHAIRPERSON: We're adjourned.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
Amnesty Hearings — Middelburg — 2000-05-10

ADV SANDI: How would you describe the political affiliation or sympathy of most elderly members of the community at that time?

MICHAEL MORUDI PHASHA: The majority of the parents were believed to be supporting the ANC, because they allowed the youth to launch the ANC Youth League branch, because some of these parents also acquired membership cards, but that is after I was arrested.  When I was released on bail I discovered that the majority of the parents had the ANC membership.  ...(intervention)

ADV SANDI: Okay, sorry, you've answered me.  Thank you, Chair.

MR SIBANYONI: Just one question.
	You were always talking about the ANC Youth League, was there no ANC branch in your area?

MICHAEL MORUDI PHASHA: I heard about the ANC launch after I was released on bail, because I discovered that the majority of the parents had membership cards of the ANC, and one of the parents was also the Chairman of the ANC.  His name was Knox Mokwala.

MR SIBANYONI: When Moses' body was discovered, were you still out or it was after you had been arrested?  Were you present when the body was discovered?

MICHAEL MORUDI PHASHA: I was not present, I saw his corpse at the mortuary.

MR SIBANYONI: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much.  Mr Phasha, you're excused.
WITNESS EXCUSED

MR RICHARD: That is Mr Phasha's case.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Richard.  Who is next?

MR RICHARD: His brother, Daniel Phasha.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
Amnesty Hearings — Middelburg — 2000-05-11

SPEELMAN ERNEST MTSWENI: Yes, initially this woman came to my home and this matter was a family matter and then later it went on until the comrades were involved.

ADV SANDI: Thank you.  Thank you Mr Chairman for your indulgence.

CHAIRPERSON: Any re-examination Mr Richard?

MR RICHARD: One or two questions Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes please.

MR RICHARD: At what stage did you change your mind and believed that the comrades were right about your grandmother?

SPEELMAN ERNEST MTSWENI: Would you please repeat your question?

MR RICHARD: What you have said so far is initially you thought it was a family matter, but then at some stage you changed your mind.  My question is at what stage, when, did you change your mind?

SPEELMAN ERNEST MTSWENI: After I heard that there were comrades who were going to come and burn down my house.

MR RICHARD: Thank you, no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR RICHARD

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  Mr Mtsweni, you are excused.
WITNESS EXCUSED

CHAIRPERSON: Who is next, Mr Richard?

MR RICHARD: Thank you Chair.  My next person I beg leave to call is Mr Mahlangu.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well.
Amnesty Hearings — Middelburg — 2000-05-11

CHAIRPERSON: We will stand down for 10 minutes, just to give everybody a chance to re-adjust themselves.

MR RICHARD: I am indebted, thank you.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

MR RICHARD: Mr Chairperson, the next, that is the last applicant in this particular series, Charles Michael Skosana.  May I call him?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mr Richard.

MR RICHARD: I call Mr Skosana.
Amnesty Hearings — Mmabatho — 1998-09-21

UNKNOWN: Mr Chairperson, at this stage I think this would be the right moment to maybe adjourn.  We have got videos tomorrow morning that could clarify certain matters.  I do not know at what stage you still want to go on, I don't know if you want to adjourn now, it is almost 4 o'clock.

CHAIRPERSON: At this stage, I see it is just before 4 o'clock, we'll adjourn.  But could we please see the representatives in our room upstairs, just to discuss when, the future running of this hearing.  We just want to get some idea of what is going to happen or what may happen.
	Until what time should we adjourn tomorrow?  Would half past nine be convenient?  Yes thank you.  We have now come to the end of today's hearing and we will adjourn.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Sorry, Mr Chairman, for your indulgence.  A question was asked as to when was Mr Nare prosecuted.  He was scheduled to appear, he was indicted before the High Court of Bophuthatswana, the week starting the 13th March, 1995 and the charges were then suspended on the 31st May, 1995 for him to, for the Tebbutt Commission to finalise its report.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Mr Chairman, further on another aspect, the issue of the two journalists.  My learned friend as I put it on record, indicated that by lunch time we shall be knowing whether  they need them or not.  I have to know, Mr Chairman, because they may be making arrangements to be here tomorrow morning and they are flying from Cape Town ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: That is one of the issues, why I wanted to see the representatives now, briefly.  We can discuss that sort of thing, if, so we'll now adjourn until tomorrow, that is the 22nd September at nine thirty in the morning and if please, the representatives could see us up in our rooms straight away, thank you.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
Amnesty Hearings — Mmabatho — 1998-09-22

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Terreblanche.  I was at this stage just asking whether you were going to call any witness or not, or lead any testimony.

MR TERREBLANCHE: No, thank you Chairperson, I conclude as well.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr van der Berg?

MR VAN DER BERG: Chairperson, we won't be calling any witnesses.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr van der Berg.  Then that will leave us with the question of argument in this matter.  Would it be possible for the parties - well, when would it be possible for the parties?  Mr Mpshe?

UNKNOWN: Mr Chairman, I've discussed this with my learned friends, and I must apologise to Mr Terreblanche, I don't think when we discussed this he was present.  ...[inaudible].   We agreed that argument will be tomorrow at 9 o'clock.

MR TERREBLANCHE: Chairperson, if the learned friends decided like that, the unlearned friend will agree to that.  I appreciate that.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  Could we make sure that we will conclude argument tomorrow because I think it would be a pity to have to wait the whole of Thursday here and come back on Friday just for the end of argument.  It would be very convenient if we could argue it tomorrow at nine.  And then if the representatives could bear in mind that we would like to conclude it also tomorrow.  Thank you very much.
	We have now reached the stage of this hearing where all the evidence has been completed and all that remains is for the representatives to make their submissions to the panel and of course for the panel to then consider the evidence and the submissions and arrive at its decision.
	We accordingly going to be adjourning this matter now until tomorrow morning in this hall at 9 o'clock when argument will be presented, first of all by Mr Hendrickse, then by Mr Terreblanche, then by Mr van der Berg and then if Mr Mpshe has any submissions to make, he is certainly allowed to make them.  Thank you very much, we will then adjourn until tomorrow at 9 o'clock.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
Amnesty Hearings — Mmabatho — 1998-09-23

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Mr Hendrickse.  We shall reserve judgment in this matter, our decision at least.
	Before we adjourn, I would just like to thank everybody who made this hearing possible.  I would like to thank the Interpreters for the work they have done, the sound technicians, the media coverage, the legal representatives and certainly not least the caterers who fed us so well as well as the security provided for us through the police and the Witness Protection Programme.  Thank you very much and I would also like to thank the authorities for making this very convenient and wonderful venue available to us.
	I would also like to thank I believe it is BOP Television for loaning us some equipment to enable us to view the video.  Thank you very much.  We will now adjourn.
HEARING ADJOURNS
Amnesty Hearings — Mmabatho — 1999-06-21

CHAIRPERSON: We've just had a very short session here, but I would nevertheless like to thank all the people concerned and the authority for making this very nice venue available. The sound technicians, the interpreters for working, the security, the police for providing security, the caterers for the very nice lunch, our secretaries, the logistics officer, everybody, Ms Lockhat who set up the hearing. Thank you very much indeed and we're sorry that we were here for such a short while because I must say we certainly do enjoy coming to this part of the world. It's very nice. Thank you.
HEARING ADJOURNS
Amnesty Hearings — Nelspruit — 1999-02-02

CHAIRPERSON: Welcome to you all.  This is our second sitting in Nelspruit.  The date is the 2nd of February 1999.  The Panel that will be proceeding to hear the applications set down for today, is the same as the one that sat yesterday.
	Before we proceed with the application of Mr Sithomo and Mr Hadebe, we would like to announce the decision in respect of the application that we heard yesterday, of Mr Anthony Mhletswa Ndlangamandla.
F I N D I N G
	Our decision in respect of that application is as follows:
	Mr Ndlangamandla applied for amnesty in respect of his conviction on the 25th of May 1994, at Piet Retief, for the murder of Mr Ben Mkosi at Lahlampondo, Pongola on the 30th of November 1993.  Ndlangamandla was sentenced to 10 years imprisonment which he is currently serving at Barberton Prison.
	Notices in terms of Section 19(4) have been served on the deceased's family, who did not attend the hearing.  The applicant, Mr Ndlangamandla who was represented by Mr D Claassen, and testified in support of his application.  He confirmed his application.  He confirmed his application and the affidavit which 
forms part of the papers.  In fact he wanted to read the entire affidavit and was eventually persuaded not to do so, in the light of the fact that the Committee had already taken note of his affidavit.
	We do not in intend to traverse the evidence of the applicant in any detail, suffice to say he was not a very good witness.  His testimony was fraught with numerous inconsistencies and contradictions.  It also differed in material respect with the allocations or versions contained in his application and the affidavit referred to herein.
	An instance of this kind of problem with his evidence, is that in his application he refers to the incident in which his grandfather was killed.  He says, and we quote him:
"Me, I was behind the house of him (him being his grandfather's house) and watching."
However, in his viva voce evidence before us, he stated that his grandfather was killed during fighting between two armed groups of the ANC and IFP supporters, which took place in an open area away from houses and other structures, and that he was a few paces away from his grandfather when this happened.
	It is clear to us that this and other instances of non-disclosure are aimed at establishing a political context to support the applicant's assertion that his acts were associated with a political objective.  
	In the result we are not satisfied that Mr Ndlangamandla has complied with Section 20(1) of the Act, and his application is ACCORDINGLY REFUSED.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Claassen, you will communicate this to Mr Ndlangamandla?

MR CLAASSEN: I will so, Madam Chair.
Amnesty Hearings — Nelspruit — 1999-02-02

CHAIRPERSON: Do you agree, because you are saying - he's saying Fawu was the dominant union at the workplace and you are saying Uwusa was the dominant union at the workplace.  Do you agree with that or do you disagree with it?

MZOBONA LEONARD HADEBE: Chairperson, I can't deny and I can't agree.

CHAIRPERSON: How can you say that?  You've just testified so many times repeatedly today, that in your opinion and as a fact ...(intervention)

MZOBONA LEONARD HADEBE: ...(no English translation)

CHAIRPERSON: Can I finish, can I finish my sentence.  You've stated that as a fact there were more Fawu members - I'm sorry, there were more IFP/Uwusa members than Fawu/ANC members in the workplace and that Fawu/ANC members were in the minority, you said that as a fact.  You were not speculating, you stated that as a fact.

MZOBONA LEONARD HADEBE: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Now how can you say you don't know, when you've stated already as a fact that that organisation together with its trade union affiliate was in the majority?  - That's your organisation.

MZOBONA LEONARD HADEBE: I would like to - I think I heard it, the question was like in Court they thought that the ANC members or Fawu members were the majority in the workplace.  I thought that's what they were saying.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, that's correct, that's what they were
saying.  This is what the Court found.  Do you agree with the finding of the Court, in your own knowledge as a person who worked at the factory?

MZOBONA LEONARD HADEBE: No, I don't agree.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  Mr Claassen, arising from the questions put by the Members of the Committee, do you have any re-examination to do?

MR CLAASSEN: I have no re-examination, Madam Chair.
NO FURTHER EXAMINATION BY MR CLAASSEN
WITNESS EXCUSED
Amnesty Hearings — Nelspruit — 1999-02-03

UNKNOWN: My submission today in this matter is that the applicant has been unable to make full disclosure and I would agree with my learned friend, that the political objective is not clear at all, or the political motive.
	I base this firstly on the fact that on the question of why he actually committed the offence, there are quite a number of reasons that are given, contrasting reasons, really.  When you look at page 3 of the bundle, he talks about the fact that there were elections, so he wanted to eliminate members of the opposing party.
	He also gives the same reason in his application for indemnity.  On page 10 he talks about the fact that the deceased had to be eliminated because he was a stumbling block towards achieving their political gains.  At page 11 he speaks about the fact that he was eliminated because there were several attempts to kill him.
	At page 28, he says because the deceased attempted to shoot him, it is quite a number of reasons, but it is true that it is not clear really what the motive is.
	Which leads me to speculate, I don't know whether I am allowed to speculate, but from the instructions that I got, it appears that the applicant feared the deceased, hence he didn't even have the, he wasn't brave enough to face him, hence he shot him at the back.
	I don't want to elaborate on that very much.  The applicant also admitted having been scared or fearful of the deceased, himself, which maybe might explain why he shot him in the back.  I don't know, but I also leave it to the hands of the Committee to make a decision.  Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much, to Ms Thabete and Mr Claassen for the assistance that you have rendered to this Committee in trying to reach a fair, just and equitable decision in respect of the application before us.
	As we have done in the past, and continue to do, during these proceedings here in Nelspruit, our decision in respect of this application, will be pronounced tomorrow morning.  We shall now adjourn until tomorrow morning at nine o'clock.  	Mr Claassen, it would appear that you will no longer be sitting in any of the matters that we will be proceeding to hear this week?

MR CLAASSEN: That is so Ms Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: May we wish you a safe journey back home to Pretoria.
	We again thank you for the assistance that you have rendered to us.  Ms Thabete, can we start at nine o'clock on the understanding that Correctional Services would have brought the applicants by half past eight tomorrow morning?
	Can you attend to that?

MS THABETE: I will do so Madam Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Can we please also advise the legal representatives who will be conducting the application on behalf of the objectors and the applicants, that we will be starting at nine o'clock.  I see they have already left.

MS THABETE: I had indicated the said fact to them.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much.  Thank you very much for attending, we shall now adjourn and reconvene tomorrow at nine o'clock.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
Amnesty Hearings — Nelspruit — 1999-02-04

MS THABETE: Okay.   Maybe I should repeat this, I said there's no reason why the committee should doubt the evidence put by Mr O'Farrell today.   It's my submission that he had no reason to lie and it's my submission that he told the truth today.   It's also my submission that this puts a big question on whether Mr Sambo has made full disclosure today, and it also puts a big question on the issue of proportionality, as to whether the killing of specifically Mr Van der Spuy and the assault of Mr O'Farrell, or attempted murder of Mr O'Farrell, was proportional to whatever objective or political objective Mr Sambo wanted to achieve.
	Without getting much into Mr O'Farrell's evidence, it's not really clear what Mr Van der Spuy and Mr O'Farrell might have done to the applicant to suggest that they had intentions to assassinate him, which really poses a question as to why was Mr Van der Spuy killed and Mr O'Farrell attacked, because from the evidence of Mr O'Farrell, they introduced themselves as policemen, and from his evidence it's not true that Mr Van der Spuy shot the applicant first, as a result the applicant shot at Mr Van der Spuy.
	I think it covers what I wanted to say in a nutshell, Madam Chair, unless you want me to address any other issue, because I would really plead with the committee to consider the response of Mr O'Farrell when he was asked what is his comment on the fact that the applicant has applied for amnesty, and in the light of what I've said as well.
	Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Ms Thabete.   Mr Black, I want to presume that there is nothing that you would want to respond to to what has already been said by Ms Thabete that has not been covered already in your legal address?

MR BLACK: I have no further comments, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.   That brings us to the end of the application of Mr Voice Morris Sambo.   What remains, therefore, is for this panel to consider this application and decide, in the light of the evidence given by Mr Sambo and Mr O'Farrell, and we shall proceed to do so and our decision will be made known to Mr Sambo and Mr O'Farrell and the deceased, Van der Spuy's relatives, in due course.
	We thank you for assisting us in this painful process, which we hope, Mr O'Farrell, will go a long way in healing the wounds that you have displayed today to be still very painful.  
	Mr Black, we believe this is the only matter that you had.   We will excuse you and we'll also excuse Mr O'Farrell and again express our gratitude to your participation in this process, it's greatly appreciated. 	We'll proceed with the next application set for today, which is that one of Mr Ngxongo.

MS THABETE: Which is the last one on the roll, Madam Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: I hope it is the last hour of that application, the time is now ten to five.
Amnesty Hearings — Nelspruit — 1999-02-04

MR WILLS: I'd have no objection to that.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Wills.   Ms Thabete, you may proceed to put questions to Mr Ngxongo.

MS THABETE: Thank you, Madam Chair, I only have two questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Ms Thabete?

MS THABETE: Mr Ngxongo, you say you worked as a hit squad.   In which area did you work under?

MONDLI WISEMAN NGXONGO: I was working in the Durban South region, involving the following townships:  Umlazi, Kwamashu, Claremont, Lamontville and Makuta.

MS THABETE: You say on your way to Nelspruit you changed numberplates on the cars.   Why did you do that?

MONDLI WISEMAN NGXONGO: Yes, I said that.   We wanted to be sure that whoever sees the car, even if it's someone coming from where we're coming from, but they won't be able to recognise it even by looking at it and looking at the registration numbers, or they will recognise the car.

MS THABETE: Besides Mr Romeo Mbambo and Mr Makwena, who else was with you in Nelspruit when you shot Mr Thalede?

MONDLI WISEMAN NGXONGO: Are you referring to the time in the shop?

MS THABETE: No, during the whole, how can I put it, from the time you arrived in Nelspruit, who else was involved in the planning and execution of Mr Thalede besides Romeo Mbambo and Mr Makwena?

MONDLI WISEMAN NGXONGO: The other person that I remember, the person that also brought a firearm, it was David Makwena.

MS THABETE: No further questions, Madam Chair.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS THABETE

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.    In view of the fact that we have to afford Mr Wills an opportunity consult with his client before he can be able to put appropriate questions to Mr Ngxongo, we will adjourn these hearings until tomorrow morning.   Can we start, gentlemen, at half past eight, is it possible?

MR WILLS: I'm at the committee's disposal, I'm prepared to start earlier if necessary.

CHAIRPERSON: Is it possible for Correctional Services to be able to be here by half past eight?
DISCUSSION REGARDING TIME OF COMMENCEMENT THE FOLLOWING DAY
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
Amnesty Hearings — Nelspruit — 1999-02-05

CHAIRPERSON: They can assist but it is the duty of your investigative unit to do that but they can assist if they have such details but not obliged to do so.  In the light of this development this matter will be adjourned, will be postponed, unfortunately we had hoped that we would be able to finalise this matter particularly because we are very interested in concluding all the incidents of which this matter is also part, of the hearings that have become popularly known as the Caprivi Hearings that are preventing Mr Wills to finalise his argument in respect of the other incidents.

MR WILLS: Yes Madame Chair, just for the knowledge of the Committee, my understanding is I got a fax this week from evidence leader Mr Nati ...[indistinct] indicating that the other matter will be finalised in fact on the 8th and 9th next month and that we'll be presenting argument and I think heads have to be in there by the 26th of this month.

CHAIRPERSON: So the other matters will be finalised save for this incident?

MR WILLS: I hope so yes.

CHAIRPERSON: So we will then adjourn this matter to a date to be arranged.  Thank you very much for your attendance.

MS THABETE: Thank you Members of the Committee.

CHAIRPERSON: We have now come to the end of our hearing here in Nelspruit.  We would like to express our appreciation to the members of the legal profession without whose assistance it will be difficult to conduct these hearings though at times became a pain on their own but it is a necessary pain.  We also would like to extend our appreciation to our translators who are doing a very difficult job but are doing it in a sterling fashion and to our administrative staff particularly the logistics officers who are responsible for arranging this venue and all other logistical requirements and our transcribers and our witness protection members and the members of the public without whose participation this process would not be a success it is proving to be and lastly to members of the Correctional Services, we really appreciated the accommodation that we were afforded by members of Correctional Services.  We know they've had to travel long distances but were able to accommodate our unreasonable requests at times to stay here until late.  We are doing so in order to make sure that we can conclude this painful process in order for our nation to advance forward.  Thank you very much for your attendance today and goodbye.
WITNESS EXCUSED
HEARING ADJOURNS