Amnesty Hearings — Thohoyandou — 1999-07-14

DAVID NEMAKHAVANI: Later I saw the deceased, that his eyes were bleeding and he was staggering, running into the house and then kids ran inside the house and the wife.  Some were trying to put the fire down.  It's then that we - they will fight while they were inside the house.  It's here that people decided to request the wife and the kids to get out of the house.
	It's then that the person with whom we agreed that the wife and the kids must get out, I'm the person who got inside and took the hand of the wife and took her outside, with these small kids.  I escorted them a bit among the group of the people, telling them that these are not the people, we are not fighting with them.  	Then we escorted them and nothing was done to them.  Then I went back again and the fight was still on.
	Later on, when entering the house, the deceased was lying on the ground.  What happened is that he was being stoned at and I also participated in stoning him.  While we were busy stoning him, somebody came with a tube, a wheel tube for a tractor with fire and it was thrown over his body.  I'm also one of the persons who took the sponges of the sofas and blankets and threw them over the body.  And we went to verify that he died.  Then he died while we were watching.
	It's then that people who were outside were called to see and verify that of course he's dead.  It's then that later, when he's dead, then we dispersed.

MR NDOU: So you admit that by virtue of your presence at the deceased' kraal, when the violence was being committed on the deceased, you were also aware of the assault on the deceased and his family and that you also intended to make common cause with those who were present and who were actually perpetrating the assault, is that correct?

CHAIRPERSON: He says he was part - he actually participated in the assault.  He participated in killing the deceased.  It's not a question of common cause.

MR NDOU: I thought maybe it will be satisfied(?) whether he actually killed ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: He says he fuelled the flames, he threw things on the flames.

MR NDOU: Okay, fine.  I just wanted to cover this aspect later on, as to the question of common purpose.  I'll leave it if there's no problem.  I don't have any problem.
	So you say you participated in the killing of the deceased?

DAVID NEMAKHAVANI: Yes.

MR NDOU: I see.  Now is there any other thing that you wish to tell the Committee?  Is there anything that you've left out, as to what you did on the day in question and as pertains these offences that you appear before the Committee to tell them that ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: You know my personal problem is that you've disclosed, I think enough.  I still don't know how you've complied with the other requirement of the Act.  The political motive.

MR NDOU: Okay, fine thanks.
	Now you say you had formed yourself into a youth congress, now how do you marry the death of the deceased with a political motive?

DAVID NEMAKHAVANI: The deceased was a person who was fighting by all means, fighting against all those things which were done politically.

MR NDOU: What did he do?

CHAIRPERSON: No.  Look here, this is what confused me.  As far as I understand this applicant's evidence, it's that this guy, the deceased, was a witch or a wizard, as a result of which a "trek pass" was issued, which he refused to adhere to.  As a result of him refusing to adhere to that trek pass, he was assaulted, set alight and killed.  How does that become a political act?  I'm not saying that it doesn't, I need the evidence to show me.

MR NDOU: Okay, perhaps that needs to come out and it's just that I'm not listening to what the Venda interpreter is saying.  Maybe I'll need to put that on.  Because as he was giving evidence he indicated that certain incidents, where there was a confrontation between the deceased and the youth of the area took place, even the day before the 6th of April, I thought that ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: No, no, that was interpreted. The fact of the matter is that his "trek pass" was related to alleged wizardry.  What political implications can be attached to his wizardry, in order to comply with the Act?

MR NDOU: Yes, that's why I wanted him to state as to what it is that he did that he says has got a political motive and how he marries that with the question of witchcraft.

CHAIRPERSON: No, he didn't, not yet.

MR NDOU: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Or if he did, it's very vague to me.

MR NDOU: Yes, that's why I said he indicated that there was a confrontation.  Now I want him to state the confrontation.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Ndou, you're misunderstand me, or maybe you don't understand me properly.  That there were confrontations with the deceased may be true.  The version of the applicant is not that the deceased was killed because of his confrontations.  The version of this applicant is that the deceased was killed because of his arrogance in not wanting to adhere to the "trek pass" instructions and that he said he would do as he pleases.  There were various attempts to get him removed, through the police etc., and the inhabitants said well then we're going to take the thing in our own hands. and that is how he met his death.
	Now this political motive is a requirement of the Act.  How does it play a part, or how do we establish it, if at all, in this application?

MR NDOU: Maybe we're not getting each other.  I agree with you, that we're not getting each other.  He said that immediately after they had issued a list they called several meetings at which they discussed with these people to leave the area and they refused to leave the area.
	Immediately thereafter he had problems with the youth, because then he started confronting them about meetings which they were holding in the area.  Now that's why I say perhaps that did not come out clearly, the way maybe it was interpreted.  That is why I was putting it to him as to how he marries the actions pertaining to the calling of the meeting that pertained to the question of witchcraft and the resultant confrontation with the youth pertaining to its suppression of the political activity in the area.  I think that's what needs to come out.

CHAIRPERSON: Why was he killed?

MR NDOU: According to my instructions, he was killed because he refused to go and also because he was   suppressing political activity.  Those are my instructions.

CHAIRPERSON: Well then it hasn't come out so clearly from the evidence.  Maybe you can have another go at getting it out of your client.

MR NDOU: Yes.  As the Chairman pleases.
	Now Mr Nemakhavani, I want you to explain very slowly and very clearly as to how you tried to marry what you call firstly as a meeting that pertained to ...(intervention)

ADV DE JAGER: But honestly, Mr Ndou, I don't think you should put a leading question about something that really worries ... and is the crux of the matter.  Let him explain why they killed the deceased.

MR NDOU: Ja, okay.  They want to find out why you killed the deceased.

DAVID NEMAKHAVANI: What happened is that firstly, the deceased was a person who was in the list of the people who were accused of witchcraft, who were expected to be evicted and then secondly, or again, what the deceased was doing ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Just hold that.  Can the interpreter please repeat that answer.  I couldn't hear from the beginning.  The whole answer.