Amnesty Hearings — East London — 1999-03-23

MR MBANDAZAYO: Chairperson, through you.  Definitely if an applicant denies involvement in a certain issue, definitely there is no way that you can, even if you were in a position to, grant it.  I think we had a similar problem in Kibler Park where the applicant was saying I'm prepared to rot in jail rather than to admit that I did that.  So I think when it comes to that it says it all.  If somebody denies that he did that, definitely there is no way that we can say that, force him to say that he did what he's saying that he did not do.

ADV SANDI: Does it not mean that there is clearly no application in respect of that particular offence?

MR MBANDAZAYO: That's what I'm trying to get at because definitely the reason why they did not apply for that is that they believe they did not commit that particular offence, so it means there is no application for that because they believe that they never committed that.  It's clear that you cannot apply for amnesty for something you believe that you did not do.  That is the reason that it is not there.
MACHINE SWITCHED OFF

ADV SANDI: Sorry Mr Mbandazayo, there was some evidence I'm trying to recall, you say - when we convened here last time several months ago, there was evidence from one of the applicants in response to a question as to why they did what they did to Donne Meyers, I'm not sure if it was Mr Thutha or Kulman, where he said it was because she was the daughter of a person (that is Mr Mike Meyers) whom they believed was an AWB member.  Do you recall such evidence?

MR MBANDAZAYO: Through you, Chairperson, I recall that evidence.  When they were asked
"Why did you take Donne Meyers because the instructions were clear that you get Mike Meyers?"
That was in response to that, and the response was that the reason was that Mike Meyers was dead and they believed that she might be of help because she is the daughter to Mike Meyers and that's when they, their evidence says that when they arrived, when they met Thandukolo, Thandukolo said she is useless, there is nothing we can get from her.

MR LAX: Sorry, there's no way they could have known she was his daughter, they'd never seen her before, but anyway ...

ADV GCABASHE: In fact my recollection, Mr Mbandazayo, is what Mr Kulman said was that they hadn't intended to take her, she wasn't part of the plan, she happened to be in the vehicle, they had hoped they would be able to let her out later or something like that but essentially the plan just went wrong.  There had been no intention at the time because they had no knowledge of her presence until they actually saw her, that she was there.  Again, the evidence was different between Mr Kulman and Mr Thutha I must say, which is part of the difficulty.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Thank you, Chairperson.  That is why I'm saying the more you go to finer details, to specific issues, the more you come up with many questions, it raises many questions.  That is why I said the best way was to deal within a ...(indistinct) broadly because it has many questions, it will leave you with unanswered questions.

ADV GCABASHE: Mr Mbandazayo, you see my difficulty is with some of this detail where the versions are not quite the same, but if I look at it in a very broad, from a broad position, my difficulty is really with the probabilities, one:  that Thandukolo was involved at all, just on the evidence that was led - I'll set this out for you - that he was involved at all in this particular mission and that in fact that they had been given an order in the first place to carry out this mission on behalf of APLA.  But assuming that they were given this particular order, we have heard other applicants tell us; we got to a particular place, things didn't look right, we aborted - that's one of the applications that has been before us - and we went back and carried out our mission at a different time because the conditions were not right.  Here the conditions were not right from the word go.
	There are APLA operatives in other missions who abort when they see the conditions are not right, these two particular operatives continue with a mission even though everything that they, every step they take turns out to be the wrong thing that happens, they don't think of aborting at any stage at all and fleeing or going back to their commander to say we'll have to try something else at a different time.  	
	A related aspect - again just talking about probabilities, you know my recollection was there had been this general reconnoitring but if I remember well, and it's in this volume 1 of the transcript, Mr Kulman did say - and I'd asked him this - they didn't know specifically that on that particular Friday afternoon at that particular time, Mr Meyers would be there selling milk.  So the impression I was left with then and that I double-checked on now, it was in terms of the record, was it was really just by pure chance that on that afternoon at that specific time he was there.
	Now as I understand APLA as an organisation, if they set off on a mission, missions were important, the objectives were very important, they won't send chaps who do not know what they are doing or do not know how to go about doing what they are doing.  And it takes me back to the whole probability that this was in fact an APLA mission carried out on behalf of APLA.  It was so uncoordinated, it was generally just so disorganised.  I have difficulty in associating it with my perception and understanding, having heard other APLA matters of the way APLA operatives were disciplined and they way in which they operated.  I don't know if you are understanding me.  It's a very broad general question really, and I don't know if you are able to assist me at this very broad level, thank you.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Thank you.  Through you, Chairperson, my answer will be simple.  I've avoided it deliberately, all these aspects because I knew that they will come up.  I know, I'm clear about that, I knew that they will come up, I avoided them deliberately.
	My answer to you is that, I will put it in a mild way to say that I think I've put enough evidence before this Committee and the other side has put enough evidence before this Committee to reach a fair and a just decision on this matter, thank you.

ADV GCABASHE: Thank you.
MACHINE SWITCHED OFF