Amnesty Hearings — Benoni — 1998-09-08

ADV STEENKAMP: Mr Chairperson my view is, and my only view, it's only my personal view, is that the evidence as it stands is uncontested.  Regarding the requirements of Section 20 as stipulated in the Act, the only basic requirements is to have a political motivation and furthermore to make a full disclosure.  The bomb blasts, the pile-ons and further on, the police officer they actually caught actually supported the evidence in that regard as far as I'm concerned.  He indicated that they were used; they knew that targets were like pile-ons and throw-away stations ...(indistinct).  So in actual fact the witness that was called by myself is actually supporting that evidence.  Nothing else except if you want to ask me anything else Mr Chairperson.  Thank you Sir.

UNKNOWN: Thank you Mr Chairperson.  Honourable Committee Members it is my humble submission that all four applicants before you should be granted amnesty.  The four applicants seek amnesty for the actions of the Johannes Nkosi Unit ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Koopedi have you got that all written out, typed out?

MR KOOPEDI: It's not, having regard to the time that I had.  It is written out but not typed up.  I will endeavour to make copies and give them to yourselves.

CHAIRPERSON: I'd prefer for you just to give us headings rather than read the whole thing out.

MR KOOPEDI: What I have before me is no more than four pages.  If you would bear with me, thank you.  As I have stated the four applicants before you seek amnesty for the actions of the Johannes Nkosi Unit and those acts can be found on page 10 of the summation presented by the Commander of the Unit.
	However their applications overlap to other actions by their sub-units.  However the applicants were able to make contact only with one such sub-unit which was the Basil February Unit in Duduza, and could only give details about the actions of this unit.  Even though the applicants could not obtain any further details and the whereabouts of other sub-units, they still did not conceal to you Honourable selves the existence of these sub-units, and they further disclosed their level of involvement with this unit.
	As it is clear that amnesty can only be granted for specific actions it is my submission that the applicants should be granted amnesty also for their involvement in the Basil February Unit.  With regards ...(intervention)

SISI KHAMPEPE: Do we have information, do we have sufficient information with regard to the specific offences committed by that sub-unit?  Has any relevant and sufficient information led before us with regard to those acts?

MR KOOPEDI: I will say the answer to that is two-fold Honourable member in that the applicants have enumerated, have specified their offences or acts of the Basil February Unit to the best of their knowledge.  Now what I'm asking for is that amnesty should be considered for their involvement up to that level of assisting and supplying whatever weaponry to this unit.

SISI KHAMPEPE: Yes I thought you were asking for amnesty in relation to the attacks on counsellors that were alleged to have been committed by the February Unit.

MR KOOPEDI: On the contrary, what I - what we're asking amnesty for is our involvement with that.  Now I am not sure whether anyone can interpret that to overflow to the actual execution of those acts, but however the applicants feel that they trained this unit; they supplied this unit with weaponry and they taught them all sorts of things, and it's only fair to ask for amnesty in that it is believed, that if the applicants had, that the unit, the sub-unit has asked for amnesty, that unit is going to say to your Honourable selves, if they come before you, that they were trained by this unit, the Johannes Nkosi Unit; and we believe that it would be a big error not to include and seek amnesty for our involvement or the applicants' involvement with the Basil February Unit.

SISI KHAMPEPE: Are you asking for amnesty for having illegally possessed weapons and ammunition?

MR KOOPEDI: To add on that, it's that, but not only that.  But we have, if you like, instigated this other unit to go and do certain acts.

SISI KHAMPEPE: There is no evidence that they ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: You see Mr Koopedi it's unnecessary for members of this panel to ask those questions, but we find ourselves in that position where we have to ask those questions.  Someone hasn't done his homework, because you ask us now on behalf of your applicants to grant amnesty.  Now for what must we grant amnesty?  What crime are these applicants asking to be pardoned for?

MR KOOPEDI: I think what they are asking to be pardoned for is to posses the weapons, the hand-grenades that were used, to supply these weapons, and also to give orders to this unit to carry out attacks.

SISI KHAMPEPE: There is no evidence that an attack was carried out as a result of the orders given by your clients.  We don't have that evidence.

MR KOOPEDI: If you will allow me I will not deliberate that point, however I thought it's incumbent on me to stress that the applicants are interested in the activities of their sub-units.

CHAIRPERSON: You've made the point as far as you can make it.

MR KOOPEDI: Yes.  I'm indebted Chairperson.  Now I have with regards to activities of the other sub-units which we do not have details on ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Well then skip that.

MR KOOPEDI: As it pleases you Chairperson.  During cross-examination of the applicants yesterday my learned friend advocate Steenkamp presented a newspaper cutting which purported to state ANC policy on the attack on the Wimpy Bar in Benoni.

CHAIRPERSON: Before you proceed, let us get one thing straight, I don't think you need to argue on anything else but the Wimpy aspect because I think it's virtually been conceded that there's a better than good chance on the successful application in respect of the other events.  The Wimpy one seems to be the focal issue for which we want to, on which we want you to argue.

MR KOOPEDI: I'm indebted Chairperson and you will notice that my entire address will revolve around that issue.  Now I have gone through the ANC's submissions, the written and oral submissions which were made to the TRC, and there is nowhere that the ANC states that the attack on Wimpy was a result of a mix-up within the ANC structures.  And because there has not been any evidence to corroborate what comes out of that newspaper cutting I would request that Exhibit B be disregarded in all its aspects as it bears no authority and authenticity.

SISI KHAMPEPE: Is there any evidence on the ANC's submissions that you have referred to that support the actions taken by your clients?

MR KOOPEDI: I am not able to pinpoint the relevant page, but I believe it will suffice to say that in the voluminous submissions that have been given, handed in to the TRC, the ANC has acknowledged that Wimpy, the Wimpy Bar in Benoni attack was their operation, was an ANC operation.  They have not distanced themselves from that operation.  Now there is ...(indistinct)

CHAIRPERSON: It's fine to say they did not distance themselves.  Did they associate themselves with it?

MR KOOPEDI: Indeed they did, the Wimpy is listed as one of the attacks that were carried out by ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: No that is so, I don't think it is in dispute that any of these applicants are members of Umkhonto weSizwe and ANC, but the drafters of that submission, is it specifically stated - I will check it, but I'm hoping that you can help me here, I don't recall the exact wording, is it stated in that submission that the ANC in its policy associated itself with the bombing or blasting of Wimpy, or have they just listed the Wimpy blast in Benoni as an event that was caused by members of the ANC?