Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — 1998-06-08

PITSO JOSEPH HLASA: The leadership did not say to us: "Kill", but I have explained that there were negotiations that failed.  Now the leadership compromised and said we should defend ourselves in any way possible so that the organisation may go on with its activities.
	On the day of this particular incident, I explained already that I was not part of the people who interrogated the victims.  The understanding that I got from the comrades who were inside the house was that these people were going to be killed.  I had faith in my comrades, I knew that they would not take such a decision without the concern of the leadership.  Maybe the people who were inside might be in a position to give a better explanation.
	I'm saying it was a general decision but they might put it specifically, who gave orders because I was not inside.

CHAIRPERSON: Was there  a general anger following the attack on Mr Lingani's house?

PITSO JOSEPH HLASA: Yes, but when these people were caught emotions were a little bit down.

CHAIRPERSON: But was there still some anger?

PITSO JOSEPH HLASA: Yes, anger is anger.  We wondered what was it that these people wanted from us, it wasn't an avenge.

CHAIRPERSON: Isn't it so that right from the beginning when you people went out to go and interrogate these people, the general feeling was simply that: "Well, today we are going to kill these people"?

PITSO JOSEPH HLASA: No, it wasn't our feeling.  We interrogated them to verify as to whether they were present and they took part in the burning of the house and whether they were members of SOSCO and on whose command they committed the act.  After the interrogation it was discovered that they were members of UDF and then the decision was taken to revenge as members of AZAPO so that in future no-one attacks us, no-one takes an advantage of us.

CHAIRPERSON: Well you say the decision was taken but that's what Commissioner Malan asked you, who took that decision?

PITSO JOSEPH HLASA: I explained that the leadership came but I do not know who among the leadership took out such an order.  I was outside fixing a car.

CHAIRPERSON: So you answer is that you personally Mr Hlasa, you don't know who took that decision, except to say that it was the leadership?

PITSO JOSEPH HLASA: That's my answer.

ADV BOSMAN: Mr Hlasa, who conveyed to you that these people had to be killed, do you remember?

PITSO JOSEPH HLASA: Kani told me to start the ignition of the car because we were going to Showela to kill these people.

CHAIRPERSON: We're not asking you who asked you to start the ignition of the car.  Committee Member Bosman's question has nothing to do with the ignition of the car, she simply asked you: "Who told you that these people had to be killed"?

PITSO JOSEPH HLASA: It's Ikaneng.

CHAIRPERSON: Please try to speak to the questions which are being put to you, thank you.

MR MALAN: May I just ask here again, you say that what was verified was that they were members of UDF but do I understand you correctly that it wasn't verified that they were indeed part of the group and it wasn't verified that they burnt the house, simply that they were members of UDF?

PITSO JOSEPH HLASA: I was talking for myself because I asked a question: "Guys, are you sure these are members of the UDF"?, then it was confirmed but I was not sure as to whether they were part of the group that burnt the house.

ADV BOSMAN: Why were you not sure Mr Hlasa?  What worried you that you asked that question?

PITSO JOSEPH HLASA: I did not interrogate people, I was outside.  When I asked the question, the question was directed to a comrade who was coming outside.  I asked a comrade a question.

ADV BOSMAN: Why did you then not ask him whether they took part in the burning of the house?  I mean, that was really the important question to ask.

PITSO JOSEPH HLASA: I did not want to know whether they took part in the burning of the house, I wanted to verify that they were members of the UDF so that we can set an example with the members of the UDF.  Not that I was acting because they took part in the burning of the house, I was acting because they were members of the UDF and it was the UDF that we were fighting.

ADV BOSMAN: So if you were told that they had not taken part in the burning of the house, would you still have killed them to make an example of them?  Did you understand the question?

PITSO JOSEPH HLASA: I understand your question.  As long as we had a confirmation that they were members of the UDF, that was fine.  The conflict between these two groups was not about what you did, it was about belonging to the other organisation.  Now it wasn't the main issue. The burning of the house was not the main issue, the main issue was being members of the UDF.

MR MALAN: Mr Hlasa, I'm not sure that I understand you again.  You say you killed them simply because they were members of the UDF, it was a question of which organisation?

PITSO JOSEPH HLASA: I'm now telling you about my participation in the killing of these people.

MR MALAN: Let me just take it further from that.  Are you saying that you were killing UDF members and UDF members were generally killing AZAPO members, was that the conflict?

PITSO JOSEPH HLASA: That is what I mean.

MR MALAN: And were you part of that conflict?

PITSO JOSEPH HLASA: That is correct, I was.

MR MALAN: Was this the first killing or were you involved in other killings?

PITSO JOSEPH HLASA: This was the first to kill a person but it was not the first to defend the comrades in other areas.  We went out to places such as Randfontein, Dlamini and Alexandra and there would be a shootout.  I don't know whether people died in those incidents but I do not remember handling people in the way we did with these ones.

MR MALAN: And then, just a last question.  Did you ever find out who gave them the instructions to burn the house?  You said you wanted to find out were they part of the UDF, were they part of the group that burnt the house and on whose instructions.  That was the major theme of the interrogation, so did you ever find out who they got their instructions from?

PITSO JOSEPH HLASA: I did not find out, I don't know whether other comrades did.  I have testified already that I did not interrogate them, I only verified that they were members of the UDF.

MR MALAN: No, but if I heard you correctly you said you didn't go in with the interrogation because you were, you felt that you wouldn't be able even to tolerate and that's why you stayed outside, because of your anger.  You weren't waiting on the outside to just get a report, you were so angry that you clearly wanted to kill them, if I understand your evidence correct, you wanted them to be killed, that's why you didn't ask for any further information, simply that they were members of the UDF, isn't that so?

PITSO JOSEPH HLASA: That is not so, I did not wait outside because of anger.  I was cleaning the car because it was full of oil.  It's not anger that made me stay outside.  I said I did not even want to get inside to interrogate them because I knew they were involved and I would not stand what was going to be said inside.  I cannot say my attitude was similar to that of other comrades.

MR MALAN: This is a new development, you say you knew that they were involved.  You didn't even want to interrogate them because you knew they were involved, is that what you're telling us?

PITSO JOSEPH HLASA: That is not what I want to tell you.  If I discovered that they were members of the UDF, I didn't get in because I knew that if I discovered that they were members of the UDF something would have happened.

MR MALAN: I heard the translation saying: you didn't go, you were cleaning the oil and you didn't go in because you knew that they were involved, you had no need of the interrogation, you knew they were involved

PITSO JOSEPH HLASA: No.

MR MALAN: That is what the interpreter said to us.