Amnesty Hearings — Sebokeng — 1998-07-10

MR MTHEMBU: No, I did not see any inside Boipatong.

MR BERGER: Did you see any police vehicles inside Boipatong?

MR MTHEMBU: No.

MR BERGER: Did you see any policemen inside Boipatong?

MR MTHEMBU: No, I did not.

MR BERGER: Did you see any whites inside Boipatong?

MR MTHEMBU: No, I did not.

MR BERGER: I take it you didn't see any white policemen inside Boipatong either?

MR MTHEMBU: No, I did not.

MR BERGER: During your criminal trial, it was part the defence case, your case, that there were members of the South African Police and in particular white members of the South African Police involved in the attack, is that correct?

MR MTHEMBU: I have no knowledge of that Sir.

MR BERGER: But it was part - let me read to you from page 3724, from the Judgment of the Court.
	It's at page 276 of the bundle Chairperson, line 11:
"Soos reeds van tevore gemeld, ontken die beskuldigdes dat hulle enige aandeel gehad het in die aanval op Boipatong gedurende die aan van 17de Junie 1992.  Uit hoofde van hulle verweer beweer die beskuldigdes dat hulle nie in staat is om te vermeld wie verantwoordelik was vir of meegedoen het aan die aanval nie maar vermeld hulle tog dat daar na die aanval gerigte was dat die Suid Afrikaanse Polisie en meer in besonder blanke lede van die Suid Afrikaanse Polisie betrokke was.  Die Staatsgetuies is met bewerings van ooggetuies wat polisie betrokkenheid tydens die sitting van die Goldstone Kommissie beweer het gekonfronteer en tydens die verdedigingssaak is twee getuies, ene Selo en ene Mabuza geroep om polisie betrokkenheid te bewys"
Now my question to you is, first of all do you confirm that it was part of your case in the criminal trial that there was police involvement and in particular the involvement of white policemen during the attack, that that was your case?

MR MTHEMBU: As I have explained Sir, I do not have knowledge about the presence of the police.  I did indicate that I did not see policemen inside the township.

MR BERGER: Do you confirm that it was part of your case that there was such police involvement and in particular involvement by white policemen?

MR MTHEMBU: I am saying I have no knowledge about that.

MR LAX: Just explain to the witness.  You know to us lawyers it's easy to know what it means: "it was part of your case" but to a lay person it's not very apparent what that means.  If you could just explain what you mean by that then he'd be able to give you a direct answer I think.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, and also in regard to what is meant by: "involvement".  Involvement in the sense that the police were there but you know, but they just stood there without taking any action or whether they were also amongst the people who were attacking.  I think that's what would maybe help.  Bearing in mind that when you tell us we will rise.

MR BERGER: Chairperson, I'm quite happy to tell Mr Mthembu what I mean and I'll do that now but as far as the actual involvement of the police, I would have to check the record on that and so I will ask that I do that on Monday.

CHAIRPERSON: I think the proper thing to do probably is for you to get a sense, to go back to the record and find out what was that degree of involvement that was mentioned so that you can put that to the witness.

MR BERGER: What was put on behalf of the defence?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, indeed.

MR BERGER: I will do that.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I think so.

MR BERGER: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Have you run out of questions now?

MR BERGER: No, Chairperson, I haven't.

CHAIRPERSON: So far?

MR BERGER: But I think this would be an appropriate point to take the adjournment.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well, so that you canvass this other matter.  We're thinking of 9 o'clock on Monday.

MR BERGER: To start?

CHAIRPERSON: To start.

MR BERGER: Yes, yes, that's alright.

CHAIRPERSON: 9 o'clock yes.  Mr Brink, 9 o'clock on Monday"

MR BRINK: I'm very happy with that.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well.  At this stage these proceedings are then adjourned until Monday at 9 o'clock.
	Thank you Mr Mthembu.  I just want to remind you that you're still under oath and you are not required to discuss this case with anyone else whilst you're still under oath, do you understand that?  Very well.
WITNESS EXCUSED
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS UNTIL MONDAY 13TH JULY 1998