Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — 1999-02-08

MR MOHLABA: So, it is your case that you were falsely implicated on these two counts of possession of a firearm and ammunition?

GLADWELL SELAHLE: That is correct.

MR MOHLABA: And that is the reason that you are not applying amnesty for those offences, because you did not carry out those deeds, is that correct?

GLADWELL SELAHLE: That is correct.

MR MOHLABA: Did you know the deceased's surname, that is Mkhabela, to be Mkhabela at the time of you planning his death or you only knew him by sight?

GLADWELL SELAHLE: We only knew him by sight, it was during the trial when I came to know about his name.

MR MOHLABA: Do you Mr Selahle, have anything to say to the Committee or the family of the victim in support of your application for amnesty?

CHAIRPERSON: Before he proceeds to do that Mr Mohlaba, do you not intend to deal with his response to the political objective which was sought to be achieved, specifically by killing Mr Mkhabela, which has not been fully and appropriately dealt with so far?

MR MOHLABA: Thank you Chair, I am indebted to the Chair.  Mr Selahle, when you planned the killing of Mr Mkhabela, what did you seek to achieve, what would the death of Mkhabela do to - well, what would you achieve in his death?

GLADWELL SELAHLE: We wanted peace to reign in the township.  People were killed every day and when we discussed, we discovered that Mr Mkhabela was involved in the killing of people.

MR MOHLABA: In paragraph 9(a) of your application form, that is page 43 of the bundle, (i), you were asked to state the act or omission and in response to that, you inserted ...

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mohlaba, I think I am actually having an incomplete response.  My note reads we wanted peace to reign in the township.  When we discovered that Mr Mkhabela was involved in the killing of people, I suppose Mr Selahle wanted to go on to tell us what, when they discovered that he was involved in the killing of the people in the township, what is it that they to do.  Am I right?  Am I right Mr Translator that I think he fell short of completing his sentence there?

INTERPRETER: Chairperson, the answer was when we discussed, we discovered that Mkhabela was one of the people who was involved, who were involved in the killing of the community.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, what did then happen when they discovered that he was involved in the killing of members of that community?

GLADWELL SELAHLE: We then decided to take an action in the aim of stopping these killings.  The only way of stopping these killings, was to kill anyone who was killing the members of the community.  Thank you Mr Mohlaba, you may proceed.

MR MOHLABA: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: If you feel that your client has fully exhausted his justification for the killing of course.

MR MOHLABA: Thank you Chair.  So is this your case, Mr Selahle, that in killing Mkhabela, the community would enjoy some peace and tranquillity, is that correct?

GLADWELL SELAHLE: That is correct.

MR MOHLABA: May I take you to paragraph 9(a) of your application form, (i), that is page 43 of the bundle, you were asked to state an act or omission and in response thereto, you mention murder of an IFP member.  Is that correct?

GLADWELL SELAHLE: That is correct.

MR MOHLABA: Why did you assume that Mkhabela was a member of the IFP?

MR LAX: Well, did he assume Mr Mohlaba, I mean really, you are putting the words in his mouth in that instance, in not a very positive way?

MR MOHLABA: Thank you Chair, why did you say that the person who was murdered, was an IFP member?

GLADWELL SELAHLE: When I arrived at the police station after I was arrested, I heard the police talking amongst themselves that a person had been shot and he is a member of the IFP and there was a possibility that there could be unrest in the township.  That is how I got this information.

ADV BOSMAN: But before the incident, how did you assume he was an IFP member if you did?  Before the arrest?

GLADWELL SELAHLE: I did not know that he was a member of the IFP before I was arrested.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mohlaba, I must express my concern at the way in which you are leading evidence which might actually be to the detriment of your client.
	It is of utmost importance that I think everyone who appears before us, has read the Act and really, comprehends the application of his client and lead that evidence that will advance his client's application for amnesty.
	To this extent, it is of utmost importance that that evidence should connect the state of mind of an applicant at the time of committing an offence, to the conflict that we are dealing with.  Up to now, there has been no such connection.
	No evidence has been led as to why Mr Mkhabela once he was seen shooting at people in a kombi, by amongst others your client, he then thought those people were being shot within the context of the political conflict that we all know existed in this township.
	We would have wanted you to have led that kind of evidence at the time when he was describing that shooting.

MR MOHLABA: Thank you Chair.  Mr Selahle, may I take you back to the, amongst other things, the reason why you joined the SDU's yourself, what was happening in the townships then, at the township where you were staying, that is in Vosloorus?

GLADWELL SELAHLE: The township was engulfed in violence.  The members of the IFP were attacking the townships.  When Commander Mabutsha approached me with the aim of joining the Self Defence Unit, I agreed.  We had to fight against those people.

MR MOHLABA: Are you able to know who was fighting who, was this violence concentrated in particular Sections of the township, did you find people in the township fighting amongst themselves or were people in a certain area of the township fighting people in another area, can you just explain fully.

GLADWELL SELAHLE: The people from the hostels, in most cases, would come and fight the people in the township.  We felt that it was necessary to fight back.  The people we were hoping would assist us, did not assist us.
	We then formed the SDU's and fight those people who were fighting the members of the community.

CHAIRPERSON: May I interpose, the people that you alleged to have been staying in hostels and were fighting the residents in your township, did you perceive them to have belonged to any political organisation?

GLADWELL SELAHLE: The situation was like this in Vosloorus, the people who were from kwaZulu Natal who were not members of the ANC, had left the hostels.  Those who were left in the hostels, were the supporters and the members of the IFP.

CHAIRPERSON: May you repeat your translation.

INTERPRETER: The people from kwaZulu Natal who were the supporters of the ANC, had left the hostel, those who were left behind were either members or supporters of the IFP.

CHAIRPERSON: Those who were left behind in the hostels, were perceived to members of the IFP by the township residents, is that your evidence?

GLADWELL SELAHLE: I explained that members and supporters of IFP were left behind in the hostels.  Those who were not the supporters, had left the hostels.

CHAIRPERSON: If I put a question to you that wants to elicit a yes or a no, I will appreciate if you can just say yes or no without having to repeat yourself.
	What made you think that Mr Mkhabela stayed in that hostel?  We have no such evidence before us here?

GLADWELL SELAHLE: I got this information from the police station when I was arrested.  Even at the trial it was indicated that he stayed in the hostel.  On the day of this incident, they were running into the hostel.

CHAIRPERSON: I am going to stop you.  I don't want any evidence about what information you obtained after your arrest, I want information about your state of mind at the time when you committed the offence.  Do we understand each other?

GLADWELL SELAHLE: Yes, we do understand each other.