Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1998-10-21

INTERPRETER: Chairperson, the speaker's mike.

MONTEGUESA BEGUISE NTULI: Would you please repeat the question?

MR WILLS: Is it not so that you illegally possessed the handgrenade which you later threw at your attackers?

MONTEGUESA BEGUISE NTULI: Yes, it is true.  Shortly before I threw the handgrenade yes, it was in my possession.  This time this simply means that the handgrenade was now mine because it was in my possession.  The house was mine as well.

SISI KHAMPEPE: May I interpose, Mr Wills?
	The lawyer would to know or the attorney would like to know shortly whether it is true that the handgrenade that you used to fight back in attacking the people or retaliating to the people who were attacking you was illegal.

MONTEGUESA BEGUISE NTULI: Yes, that is true, the handgrenade was illegal.  It was quite a powerful handgrenade, an F1 from Russia.

MR WILLS: Yes, and is it also not true that there was a possibility that you could have also run away outside of the house to get away from your attackers, but rather you decided to stay behind and you eventually threw the handgrenade at the attackers?

MONTEGUESA BEGUISE NTULI: Yes, it is true, Chairperson, that I was in the position to flee and leave my house behind so that they could continue doing whatever.

CHAIRPERSON: That would have meant that you left Enoch Mzuzu behind, who was in a bad state after the teargas, wouldn't it have been?

MONTEGUESA BEGUISE NTULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: Just finally, Mr Ntuli, I just want a little bit more detail.  You mentioned in your affidavit and also in your evidence that Msizi - this Msizi is a person by the name of Msizi Nkunu, he had been allocated by political structures to guard you, is that correct?

MONTEGUESA BEGUISE NTULI: Yes, that is correct, that Msizi had been delegated to take care of my safety in the Northern Natal region.  The organisation at the time, or should I say there were many members of our union who were being killed and so that at the end a decision was made that we should be guarded so that we could be safe from harm.

MR WILLS: Yes, and Msizi Nkunu at the time was a member of MK, is that right?

MONTEGUESA BEGUISE NTULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR WILLS: Thank you, Mr Chairperson, that is all the evidence from the applicant.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Prior?

ADV PRIOR: Thank you, there's just one aspect, Mr Chairman.
	It seems that as far as you were concerned you were acting in self-defence when you threw the grenade at your attackers, because if you hadn't done that they would have surely come into the house and dispatched of yourself and your friend, is that right?

INTERPRETER: Chairperson, the speaker's mike.

MONTEGUESA BEGUISE NTULI: Yes, it is true that I was fighting in self-defence, trying to protect myself or defend myself and my property.  But I am here to ask for amnesty for using a handgrenade that was illegal at the time and also the attempt on their lives.  Yes, I am asking for amnesty in respect of these incidents.

ADV PRIOR: At page 14 of Exhibit A a document was put up, an extract from I believe the amnesty applications of the Caprivi trainees, one Romeo Mbambo and it seems that in that application the attack on yourself was well documented from paragraph 125 of that document, where it seems that those persons had planned to attack and kill you, did you see that document in the bundle that was shown to you?  What I'm putting to you is that it seems that there was a planned attacked on your life on that day as you have indicated, and that comes from a different source.

MONTEGUESA BEGUISE NTULI: Yes, that is correct.  It is also clear that the political climate at the time indicated to that because Romeo himself did not plan this himself but it was due to the political climate at the time.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, the political climate was violence on both sides wasn't it, because Romeo in his application says that this attack was in retaliation for an attack on Councillor, Mrs Ntjale's house?

MONTEGUESA BEGUISE NTULI: I would not be in the position to say but I know it is true that there were attacks and counter-attacks.  Some of these attacks were planned and some were not.
	Myself as a leader, if people did things as members of their organisations trying to protect their membership, that is their prerogative, that's their right.  In my case I was given somebody to guard me but yes, I know that Mrs Ntjale was also attacked in the very same area where we resided.

ADV PRIOR: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

MR FALCONER: Thank you, Mr Chairman.
	Mr Ntuli, can I refer you to page 18 of Exhibit A?  You will see that that is an affidavit which you deposed to ...[intervention]

MR WILLS: Sorry, Mr Chairperson, I don't think the applicant has got the whole bundle, if I can just cause him to ...[indistinct]

MR FALCONER: Do you confirm that that is an affidavit that you deposed to, Mr Ntuli?

MONTEGUESA BEGUISE NTULI: Maybe I would have to explain first if I may be given the opportunity to do that.  There are two affidavits here now.  With your permission I would like to explain.

ADV POTGIETER: Yes, please explain.

MONTEGUESA BEGUISE NTULI: Thank you, Chairperson.   The attack on Cosatu members as eSikhawini and members of the UDF involved the IFP and the police force.  On several occasions I went to the police to ask for help and they did not respond, so that this affidavit is such that I made it before I was assured that I would be safe.  In December 1996 the Commission was Empangeni, I stated in the records that I did the first affidavit under pressure because I did not trust the police at the time and it was not easy for me to trust the police at the time.  This I had already rectified.
	I pointed this out during the Commission in December 1996.  Yes, I did sign the affidavit but under duress following the situation at the time.  That is why we have this affidavit to which you are referring now.

CHAIRPERSON: That affidavit is as far as I can see, full of criticisms of the police.  You're naming members of the police force, you say they didn't appear to help you.

MONTEGUESA BEGUISE NTULI: Yes, it is true, they did not even bother to come to my assistance.  I must also point out that in December 1996 when I made this statement nobody came to me to force me to say things as they were.  If you look at this statement it clearly indicates that they were trying to attack me with a handgrenade.  There was nothing I could have said at the time that I could do something to protect me against the police because the police would kill me.  I then had to make use of other avenues such as making use of structures that were legally organised.

SISI KHAMPEPE: On this affidavit, Mr Ntuli, there is nowhere where you talk about you attacking them with a handgrenade, that is the people who were attacking you, is that not so?

MONTEGUESA BEGUISE NTULI: Yes, there is such ...[intervention]

SISI KHAMPEPE: I'm talking about this one.

MONTEGUESA BEGUISE NTULI: Yes.

SISI KHAMPEPE: We don't have that information here.  As you have indicated you did not include that here because you did not trust the people who were investigating the matter?

MONTEGUESA BEGUISE NTULI: Yes, that is correct.

MR FALCONER: Mr Ntuli, if I can refer you to paragraph 20 of that affidavit and I'll read it quickly, you state
"I heard a loud bang and something exploded outside the kitchen.  I saw afterwards that the attackers had attempted to throw  a handgrenade into the kitchen but it had rolled back outside.  It exploded about 1 metre from the kitchen door.  The door and roof were damaged in the explosion."
Now Mr Ntuli, it would seem that that paragraph is a completely different version of events to that which you state in your affidavit supporting your application for amnesty, and in particular at paragraph 16 of that affidavit, would you agree with me?