Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — UNKNOWN

MR DU PLESSIS: : Mr Chairman, as I have pointed out atthe beginning of these hearings, we are not sure about the interpretationof the Act pertaining to evidence given in this forum in respectof possible later proceedings.   I cannot therefore make admissionsor accept certain facts which might become very important laterand which might not be excluded from a future criminal trial andit is on that basis that I want to place that on record.   Forpurposes of these hearings the importance pertains to the questionof the ages of the people.

JUDGE NGCOBE: If, for the purpose of these proceedings,you are not willing to admit that these are the victims and ifthat becomes an issue, I hope you are aware of the profound impactand influence this is going to have on these proceedings.   Oneof the problems is that you would be asking, or your clients wouldbe asking for amnesty in respect of the people that you don'tadmit have been the people placed before us and it could alsohave an impact on whether or not we have given notice in termsof the Act to the correct people.   That, in turn, brings intoquestion as to whether or not procedural requirements have beencomplied with.
8.1b MR /...
MR CURRIN 664 M MAKOLANE

MR DU PLESSIS: : With respect Mr Chairman, I have to disagree,with respect.   The application was brought by the applicantson the basis that they did commit an act, that 10 people did die,they are not disputing that.    All they are saying is that inrespect of their applications they do not know who the victimsare and...

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: Have we given the notice to the correctpeople in terms of that Section of the Act?

MR DU PLESSIS: : Well Mr Chairman obviously in the lightof what was raised now, it might be possible that some of thesepeople are not the people involved.   The point...

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: All of them?

MR DU PLESSIS: : Or perhaps all of them.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: Maybe we have given the notice to the wrongpeople altogether?

MR DU PLESSIS: : Mr Chairman I have pointed out this aswell, and that is that the obligation in respect of Section 19does not rest on the applicants.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: But you can't eat your cake and still haveit.   You must decide whether you are accepting that these arethe victims or possibly these could be the victims and then weproceed with the matter on that basis.   If you don't, then youmust concede that possibly we have given the notice to the wrongpeople.   You can't have it both ways.

MR DU PLESSIS: : Mr Chairman I've raised this point previouslyand the compliance with Section 19(4), as I understand it, cannotstand in the way of a decision in terms of Section 20.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: Well you can't commence the hearing withoutcomplying with it, don't jump the first step and go to the lastone.
8.1b MR /...
MR CURRIN 665 M MAKOLANE

MR DU PLESSIS: : Yes that might be so Mr Chairman, butthis was not raised at the beginning of the evidence.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: Well you seem to be raising it now.

MR DU PLESSIS: : Mr Chairman, with respect, nobody hastold us how the victims were identified.   Nobody has come tous and has said to us on what basis these victims were identified,it only became clear throughout the proceedings.

UNKNOWN: But Mr Du Plessis you have applied for amnestywith regard to person "X", we cannot give amnesty withregard to a certain person if it is not the person for whom itwas applied.   We cannot give you amnesty with regard to a certainperson if we do not know if those persons were activists, whothey were or generally there are 10 persons who died, we cannotidentify them.   How can we, with enough certainty as requiredby the Act, determine that?

JUDGE WILSON: : ...in respect of the murder of the 10 peoplewho occupied this Kombi whose bodies were found in it and on whominquests were held, they are specific people but you cannot identifythem.

MR DU PLESSIS: : Yes, yes we cannot identify them.

JUDGE WILSON: : You cannot put names to them but you canidentify the people in respect of whom you are asking for amnesty.

MR DU PLESSIS: : Yes.   Mr Chairman if this is a problemthen I can foresee various difficult problems for people in theposition of the applicants.   If, for instance, they ask amnestyonly pertaining to these 10 and the Attorney-General for somereason or another, after the cut-off date of the amnesty period,determines and finds that two of these people were wrongly identifiedand there were another two
8.1b people /...
MR CURRIN 666 M MAKOLANE
people, then the applicants would have been prejudiced and theycannot ask amnesty in respect of those other two that have beenidentified.   So that is why the applicants say Mr Chairman theonly obligation on the applicants is to apply for amnesty in respectof that which they know, and as I understand criminal law, theycould have been prosecuted for murder and other acts, but let'stake murder, specifically pertaining to the people who were inthe Kombi and in respect of which an inquest has been held.  That is how I understand it Mr Chairman.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: But if the admission is made for the purposeof these proceedings and the proceedings come to a close, I don'tsee the sort of problem that you seem to be foreseeing with regardas to whether or not wrong people were, amnesty was granted inrespect of certain people.   Those admissions would have beenmade for the purpose of the proceedings and these proceedingswould have been closed.   I have profound difficulties with anysuggestion, with any argument that you could in the one breathargue that well I'm not prepared to accept that these are thevictims but in the same breath, want us to tell ourselves thatwe have given the notice to the correct people.   I can't reconcilethese two.

MR DU PLESSIS: : Mr Chairman with the utmost respect, Idon't know what is expected of the applicants in this regard.  Clearly I cannot be requested to make an admission of somethingthat we are not sure of and that we don't have evidence aboutand bind my clients in a different forum later in respect of suchan admission.   The only possibility that I can see is that onecan go from the viewpoint that for purposes of these proceedingsand for purposes of amnesty, reserving all the rights of the
8.1b applicants /...
MR CURRIN 667 M MAKOLANE
applicants and without waiving any rights whatsoever, that itis accepted that she represents the victims as far as these proceedingsgo.   I am even hesitant to make that admission Mr Chairman.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: There are many possibilities.   One ofthe possibilities is that if that becomes an issue there shouldbe further investigation of the matter to determine whether thesewere the correct victims.

MR DU PLESSIS: : Yes, Mr Chairman as I understand the proceedingsit is possible, as I understand it, after a hearing to do that.  If I understand it correctly it might be possible to do thatin the best way possible.   The problem that you've raised howeveris let's say for argument's sake, that it is totally impossibleto make any further link whatsoever between the deceased and theapplicants, surely Mr Chairman that cannot stand in the way ofthe applicants' amnesty application?

CHAIRPERSON: Very well, we may have to apply our minds tothis as a substantive issue at some stage.   I think that forthe present I would like this matter to be taken as far as itcan, purely evidentially so let Mr Currin be afforded the opportunityof placing before us the maximum information he's in a positionto do and maybe we might see some light at the end of the tunnelafter that.   Mr Currin you asked for a short adjournment?

MR CURRIN: : Could we have a short adjournment?   Thankyou sir.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS - ON RESUMPTION

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Currin?