Special Hearings — Caprivi Hearings — 1997-08-04

MR MACADAM: In 1995 two members of the KwaZulu Police and a supporter of the Inkatha Freedom Party were convicted in a Circuit Court of the then Natal Provincial Division for various politically motivated murders in the Esikhaweni district of KwaZulu/Natal.  In passing sentence, the Learned Judge called for an investigation into the accused's allegations that their activities formed part of a greater conspiracy to orchestrate political violence in the province.  The three accused claimed membership of a group which has been given the title of, "The Esikhaweni Hit Squad".  This hearing will focus on certain of the activities of this squad.  The three accused will be called as witnesses.  Evidence will be led by Gcina Mkhize, the self-confessed leader of the squad.
For those Zulu-speaking members of the audience, we would ask you to get hold of earphones.  The evidence will be broadcast to the floor in English.  If there are Zulu speakers in the audience, who cannot speak English, please get hold of the simultaneous translation earphones, so that you can follow the proceedings in Zulu if you wish to.  Otherwise the language broadcast out to the floor will be in English.  
The three accused will be called as witnesses.  Firstly, evidence will be led by Gcina Mkhize, who is the self-confessed leader of the squad.  He will testify
 /concerning the
1A concerning the creation of the squad, the persons from whom he received instructions, who were aware of the squad's illegal activities, the selection of targets for elimination and the persons who instructed such eliminations.  Finally, he will testify as to various attempts which were devised to prevent the activities of the squad being detected and prosecutions being instituted.
Secondly, Romeo Mbambo, a member of the squad, will give evidence as to how eliminations were executed and, furthermore, describe a range of strategies which were designed to avoid detection and prosecution.
Finally, Israel Hlongwane, who was also a member of the squad, will describe how he came to be involved in its activities.  He will also highlight other political violence which took place in the area over and above the activities of this squad.  
There will be new evidence which has not been raised in any court of law from a person by the name of Zweli Mkhize, who was also a member of the squad, and the person, Daluxolo Luthuli, who testified in sentence at the trial of these accused and who played a pivotal role in its creation and structure.   
It should be noted that this is a hearing and not a trial and that the evidence which will be presented will merely attempt to present an overall view of the squad's activities and not document each and every illegal act.  The record of the trial against the three accused will be handed in as an exhibit at these proceedings.  In order to fit the squad's activities into their proper context, it is necessary to examine the role played by certain of the
 /above witnesses
1A above witnesses in prior politically-motivated violence in the Hammarsdale and Pietermaritzburg areas in KwaZulu/Natal.  The witnesses in this regard will be Daluxolo Luthuli and Zweli Dlamini.
Finally, since three of the members of the squad were part of a group of IFP supporters who received training by components of the former SADF in the Caprivi in 1986, it will be necessary to explore whether any of the illegal activities testified to may be linked with or attributed to the training which formed part of an operation which bore the code name, "Marion".  In this regard, the motives of the various components of the SADF and their individual members responsible for the operation will have to be considered.  Since the operation was approved of by the State Security Council and certain aspects sanctioned at what is termed the highest political level, the role of the Government of the day itself will have to be assessed.  
Finally, the involvement of the Security Force members involved with the so-called Caprivi trainees and their political leaders, once the group returned to KwaZulu/Natal, will also be canvassed.  
Since these issues were canvassed in the trial of S v Peter Msane and Others, which was heard in the Durban High Court in 1996, the record of this trial, including the Operation Marion documents, which were handed in as an exhibit in the case, will form part of these proceedings.  In this regard it should be noted that this hearing will not be a retrial of the so-called KwaMakutha attack itself, the specific allegations against each accused in relation to that offence.  The relevance
 /is only to
1A is only to the evidence and testimony which was given relating to Operation Marion and the Court's finding as to who was responsible for the attack.  It's worthy at this stage to look at two sections of the judgment.  I read, firstly, from page 4447 of the judgment, where the Learned Judge found that,
"There can be no doubt that the deceased at KwaMakutha were gunned down by people who were members of the trainees recruited by Inkatha and trained in the Caprivi, but as to their numbers there is conflicting evidence within the State case itself.  There can also be little doubt that Opperman and Cloete ..."
These were two members of the former South African Defence Force, who were involved in some form of liaison capacity with the trainees both in the Caprivi and on their return to KwaZulu Natal, 
"... between the two of them planned the operation, instructed or guided those trainees that took part in it as to what to do about it.  This emerges from the evidence relating to the vehicle that was used, signed placed upon the vehicle, which is confirmed by the witnesses present at the scene.  It is common cause that the weapons used were AK-47 rifles and there is a broad correspondence in evidence of the three of them as to the events immediately preceding, during and after the
 /KwaMakutha massacre."
1A KwaMakutha massacre."
Turning then to page 4405 of the judgment and dealing further with the remarks concerned as to the role played by Opperman and Cloete, quoting again from the judgment,
"It is likely it seems to us, that Opperman and Cloete must have had backing from somewhere.  The question is from where and from whom."
The purpose of this hearing is to attempt to shed light on these questions which were raised by the Learned Judge, which warranted further investigation and follow-up action.
In regard to these specific allegations, the evidence before this hearing will be the following.  There will be the evidence of the political commissar of the group, that is Daluxolo Luthuli.  He played a pivotal role in the training that was received in the Caprivi and was also involved with the deployment of the trainees in KwaZulu/Natal.  Two members of the group, Zweli Dlamini and Gcina Mkhize, who were trained in the Caprivi, will give evidence concerning their training.  There will be further evidence by an expert in the field of counter-revolutionary warfare.  His evidence will be tendered once these three witnesses have testified. 
There will be a submission, and I stress it is a submission, it is not evidence, from Howard Varney, who is the convenor of the now disbanded Investigation Task Unit, which launched the investigation into Operation Marion.  His submission will be tendered first before any of the witnesses testify, simply as it conveniently sets the scene and explains the operation to the community which
 /has an interest
1A has an interest in the hearing.  
In this regard it should be noted that prior to the hearing, the Commission sent a notice, in terms of section 30 of the Act which governs the Commission's proceedings, to each and every party who may be implicated to his or her detriment by the nature of the evidence.  The notice took the form of a submission by Mr Varney in respect of those specific role-players.  It was divided into various categories - members of political parties, member of the SADF structures, member of the State Security Councils.  Mr Varney made a written submission in respect of each and every one of those role-players and the Commission then, in terms of its notice, attached that submission together with the relevant documentation which related to the submission.  
What has transpired subsequently is that Mr Varney decided, for his own purpose, to compile or combine these separate submissions into one document.  This was only done, unfortunately, at a late stage, due to the fact that he was overseas until shortly before the commencement of this hearing and this document, which does not add any new allegations, but merely combines the circulated allegations, is in the process of being compiled and will be submitted to the relevant parties and there has also been, it would appear, certain administrative difficulties that not all the persons received certain of the documentation.  This is being rectified and will be made available to all the parties during the luncheon adjournment.