Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-11-18

MR PANDAY: No but my point being, Mr Ntshangase, if there was any political activity why would the Induna inform you that it's political if he was hiding his political affiliation.  If people in the area kept a secret of their political affiliation why must he now tell you of the political affiliation or any activity that's political because to an effect the Induna he had to have been on a political side?

CRAWFORD SIPHO NTSHANGASE: As I were saying we were working hand in hand with the Indunas and everyone.  I think I don't see any reason why he would hide that to me, he can tell me what was happening.

MR PANDAY: But he may very well have chosen not to tell you, that's also very possible.  Now Mr Ntshangase, you mention a lot that you worked hand in hand with the Induna.  Now the applicant has testified that there was always a perception that the police worked hand in hand with the IFP.  Now isn't it very well possible that on the day of the attack that firstly the applicant thought that he was being attacked by the attackers, the IFP and he was also scared of the police because they believed them to be part of the IFP?

CRAWFORD SIPHO NTSHANGASE: As I've already said there was no political organisation in the area and then there was no reason, the police at mid Illovo would not have been involved in any of these things because there was no political activities there.

MR PANDAY: Mr Ntshangase, you seem to stress the point that there's no political activities, what was the date that you were appointed in the mid Illovo area as a policeman?

CRAWFORD SIPHO NTSHANGASE: It was in 1984.

MR PANDAY: 1984?  Now in 1984 isn't it correct that the organisation, namely the ANC was still banned?

CRAWFORD SIPHO NTSHANGASE: That is correct.

MR PANDAY: Now when you joined the mid Illovo back in 1984 what was your position there?

CRAWFORD SIPHO NTSHANGASE: I was a constable.

MR PANDAY: And at the time of the arrest of the applicant isn't it correct you were merely the investigator?

CRAWFORD SIPHO NTSHANGASE: That is correct.

MR PANDAY: And the primary concern of the police in the mid Illovo area was to attend to more criminal activity not  political activity in the area, is that also correct?

CRAWFORD SIPHO NTSHANGASE: Yes I will say that is correct.

MR PANDAY: Now then isn't it also possible that the police in the mid Illovo area were not always kept abreast of any political activity or underground activity in that area because this would have come obviously from special branch and not your regular police?

CRAWFORD SIPHO NTSHANGASE: Yes that is correct.

MR PANDAY: Thank you.  Now Mr Ntshangase, just to get one more important question, in your affidavit on page 80 of the bundle of documents, if you'd like a copy I've got a spare copy, if you would just read it?  Right, you testified in the beginning in your evidence that you identified yourself and then the constable kicked the door in and it was at that point that shots were fired.  Now let me refer you to paragraph 4 of your affidavit that states that as is quoted
"On our arrival at the door I knocked at the door"
Right?  "I knocked at the door", is that correct?

CRAWFORD SIPHO NTSHANGASE: Yes.

MR PANDAY: Right now this is where the change in the evidence comes
"And Constable le Roux kicked the door open.  After that there was a gunshot which was fired from the inside of the door."
Now the discrepancy in your evidence now is that you knocked, you identified yourself and then the door was kicked.  Now where does the discrepancy lie, in your affidavit on page 80 or the evidence that you've tendered before this Commission?

CRAWFORD SIPHO NTSHANGASE: The evidence on page 80.

MR PANDAY: Is that the correct version?

CRAWFORD SIPHO NTSHANGASE: That is correct.

MR PANDAY: Okay the reason we'll also submit was that in keeping with the version that the applicant has put before this Committee that he heard the footsteps and the door was kicked in and the shot went off.  Right, now more importantly Mr Ntshangase, the applicant has testified that he believed that at that point he or the people in the area were being attacked by the attackers, namely the IFP.  Now keeping in line with what you've mentioned, that paragraph 4 is now the correct version of what took place, isn't it now very possible that when that door was first kicked in this applicant immediately responded by thinking that the attackers were now attacking them as opposed to the police coming to arrest him?

CRAWFORD SIPHO NTSHANGASE: The point here that I'm against it, is that you've saying that IFP mentioning political things.  At that stage, as I've said, there was no politics in that area.  That is why that is the point I'm against it on this applicant here, on this application here.

MR PANDAY: You see Mr Ntshangase, whilst you can accept that or whilst we may listen to what you are saying that you are against the application on the basis that there was no political activity, what you must also bear in mind is that you were not in a position to know of any political activities because one, your job revolved around mainly criminal activities as in murders, robberies, as in the normal routine of what you policemen would attend to in these areas.  You never received any directives from the special branches that there were political activities and as you've testified the special branch has never kept you, you or the mid Illovo Police abreast of any political activities.  Now that we find hard to believe.  We're not saying you're a liar, we're just saying that this information cannot be within your knowledge and as such it doesn't put you in a position to challenge the version of the applicant.  Do you have any comment on that?

CRAWFORD SIPHO NTSHANGASE: No comment.

MR PANDAY: Nothing further.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR PANDAY

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  Mr Mapoma, any questions?

MR MAPOMA: Just a few Mr Chairperson.
	When Tandakwasi Mthembu told you that he belonged to no political organisation, did you believe him?

CRAWFORD SIPHO NTSHANGASE: Yes I did believe him because as I've already said we didn't know any political activities in our area.

MR MAPOMA: Is that the reason why you believed him?

CRAWFORD SIPHO NTSHANGASE: That is correct.

MR MAPOMA: Did you ask the applicant what political organisation he belonged to?

CRAWFORD SIPHO NTSHANGASE: No I didn't ask him.

MR MAPOMA: Why?

CRAWFORD SIPHO NTSHANGASE: Because to my knowledge and since I was in the area for a long time I didn't have any information or got any information in that regard to the political activities.

MR MAPOMA: No, no, no, no, Mr Ntshangase.  You see you were dealing with a situation there when Mthembu was a complainant of attempted murder from Mr Mkhize.  Now in the course of investigation of this you asked the complainant whether he belongs to any political organisation, he gives you an answer, you believe him.  Why don't you ask then the accused person?

CRAWFORD SIPHO NTSHANGASE: That could have slipped out of my mind on that day.

MR MAPOMA: Do you know Sepo Mkhize?

CRAWFORD SIPHO NTSHANGASE: No, I didn't know him but I used to - I heard about him.

MR MAPOMA: And you heard that he is Sibo Mkhize's father?

CRAWFORD SIPHO NTSHANGASE: That is correct.

MR MAPOMA: Did you hear that he was killed by a policeman?

CRAWFORD SIPHO NTSHANGASE: Yes that is correct.

MR MAPOMA: Did you hear that he was a member of the ANC?

CRAWFORD SIPHO NTSHANGASE: Yes I heard about that.

MR MAPOMA: Now during all this were you aware that the applicant was also a member of the ANC?

CRAWFORD SIPHO NTSHANGASE: No I wasn't aware of that.

MR MAPOMA: Yes, now you agree with the applicant that Tandawasi Mthembu was the leader of what you call a faction which were staying in the farm?

CRAWFORD SIPHO NTSHANGASE: Yes.

MR MAPOMA: And in the other area it was the Mkhizes?