Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — 1999-02-18

MR RICHARD: (Cont)
	Thank you.
	What we were dealing with before the adjournment was that in the statement which we know is in some ways fabricated, there are some correct statements.  I had referred you to the second paragraph where it reads:
"He, (the deceased, Mr Dhlomo) had on a red T-shirt and a blackish trousers and red shoes and red socks."
Now we know that to be correct from the police docket.  Does that tally with your memory?

MR TSHABALALA: Yes, I do remember as to what he had on.

MR RICHARD: Now when Mr Dhlomo wore a T-shirt, did he tuck the shirt into his trousers of did he leave it hanging out, do you remember?

MR TSHABALALA: No, I don't remember.

MR RICHARD: Now from Mr Dube's evidence we do know that there was a man called Joe who did live in Naledi.  Why in this fabricated statement did you use the combination of Joe and Naledi?

MR TSHABALALA: I don't remember the reasons thereof.

MR RICHARD: Now wouldn't it be dangerous to name an activist who was part of the MK and his suburb, wouldn't that be a breach of security?

MR TSHABALALA: It may be so.

MR RICHARD: Now the next thing.  We know from other sources that he was given over R1 000 on the Saturday, and here you say he had with him a diary, a radio cassette and a sum of R830, so is or is not the sum of R830 correct?

MR TSHABALALA: I think it is so because he is the one who said he had that much money with him.

MR RICHARD: Did you see the money?

MR TSHABALALA: No, I did not see the money, I did not even count it.

CHAIRPERSON: When did he say he had so much money?

MR TSHABALALA: He got to me during the day, it was on Sunday if I'm not mistaken.

MR RICHARD: So you don't know what happened to the money?

MR TSHABALALA: No, I have no idea.

MR RICHARD: Now we do know from the police docket that he had with him a diary, a collection of telephone numbers, business cards.  How did you know that he had that?

MR TSHABALALA: As I said, we met during the day on that day, he came to my house.  Now I'm assuming those are things that were visible because the writing of that statement as I said, the content is not completely true.

CHAIRPERSON: What time did he come to your house?

MR TSHABALALA: It was during the day.  I don't know what time it was.

CHAIRPERSON: And when had you seen him before that day?

MR TSHABALALA: I think I'd seen him a week or two, I don't quite remember.

MR RICHARD: Now when you say he had a radio cassette with him, that we can assume to be one of the truthful parts of this statement.

MR TSHABALALA: Yes.

MR RICHARD: Now when you use the word "cassette", I presume you imply that it was a cassette recorder on which you could play music and record things?

MR TSHABALALA: I think it's some device like that.  There will be something that people will have and hang it on the belt on the waist and have the headset as well.  It appeared to be something like that, what I just described.

MR RICHARD: But you know what a cassette, walkman, or whatever they call it is.  You would know exactly what it is by looking.

MR TSHABALALA: Yes.

MR RICHARD: Then we also know from Mr Dube that one of the things that Mr Dube hangs his opinion that the deceased was an informer, was that he had a device on his side on his belt.  Was it the same thing, could it be the same thing?

MR TSHABALALA: I may not know but what I saw looked and appeared like a radio.  I would not know.  You see I'm not fully conversant with such devices.  I only saw something like a radio.

MR RICHARD: Can you give us a description of this thing?  How big was it, what colour was it?

MR TSHABALALA: I don't quite remember the colour, but it was something a little bit tiny, small rather.

MR RICHARD: According to Mr Dube about this size, the size of the ...(indistinct)?

MR TSHABALALA: Well it may be that size.

MR RICHARD: Now did you ever see in either a working order or a broken state, the thing that Mr Dube alleges that he found on the person of the deceased?

MR TSHABALALA: No, I'd never seen the one he found.

MR RICHARD: Did he have the tape-recorder when he died?

MR TSHABALALA: I did not search the man, and also I did not take any notice.  I only saw him in the state he was when he came to me.

MR RICHARD: Now I then take it that the next paragraph is where you start fabricating
"This meeting at this house was not arranged, it just happened."
That's not true?

MR TSHABALALA: That is not true.

MR RICHARD: And the next paragraph where you say he got ...(indistinct) and the other person who you did not know went to buy food, the cafe was not far from the house.  That part is also not true?

MR TSHABALALA: This issue of Naledi is not true.

MR RICHARD: And the remains of that paragraph where you say you got the food is untrue, you've answered that question as would be the next paragraph
"A small walk and then we"

MR TSHABALALA: As I said that issue of Naledi is not true or it's not the truth.

MR RICHARD: Now in Emgeni or somewhere thereabouts, is there a KwaNguni - I'm sorry I can't read it - Mgeni South General Dealer?

MR TSHABALALA: What about?

MR RICHARD: KwaMgeni General Dealer in Mgeni South?  Is there such a thing?

MR TSHABALALA: Yes there is a store or a shop called Mgeni.

MR RICHARD: Why did you put that into the statement?

MR TSHABALALA: I'd already said that what was in that statement was fabricated so it will create some picture.

MR RICHARD: When we come to the issue of proportionality we have a scenario where a man, your friend the deceased, had been a member of the cell for a very short period of time and we know from other evidence that the deceased had not taken part in any operations with the cell and in fact had been out of contact with the cell for a considerable period.  In those circumstances, do you think that an execution was the only appropriate manner of dealing with the situation?

MR TSHABALALA: This was such a long question, I lost you somewhere.

MR RICHARD: Did you agree with those circumstantial factors that are outlined which went, the deceased had been a member of the cell for a very short period of time, then he's out of contact with the cell, that's the next factor.  The next factor is he never took part in any operations with the cell, never was party to planning any operations with the cell.  Do you agree with those factors and those statements?

MR TSHABALALA: Yes.

MR RICHARD: And in fact other than knowing you, his good friend, the other cell members, he really didn't know very much at all?  Yes or no?

MR TSHABALALA: Yes.

MR RICHARD: In those circumstances, if he had been an informer, what he could have told the police was very little more than the names of the cell members?

MR TSHABALALA: I have no idea.

MR RICHARD: Now in those circumstances, my next question is do you think that it was appropriate to execute him?

MR TSHABALALA: Please repeat your question.

MR RICHARD: I've outlined various factors surrounding the situation as it was perceived in January 1988.  My next question is, in those circumstances if he had been an informer as Mr Dube seemed to believe, was the only manner that the situation could be dealt with, the execution?

MR TSHABALALA: I think that necessitated a need or some explanation to be granted or to be given to the members of the cell.

MR RICHARD: Right, on the Saturday, I believe that would be the 23rd January 1988, were you at a meeting?

MR TSHABALALA: I don't remember but a good part of my life was to attend meetings.

MR RICHARD: Now were you with the deceased at a meeting that Saturday?

MR TSHABALALA: No, I don't remember.

MR RICHARD: No I confirm there are no further questions with my client Mr Chairperson.
	There is a version that I will put to you that you were with the deceased that Saturday at a meeting, yes or no?

MR TSHABALALA: I said no, I don't remember.

MR RICHARD: No further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR RICHARD