Amnesty Hearings — Sebokeng — 1998-07-14

CHAIRPERSON: Is there anything arising?

MS PRETORIUS: No questions, thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Strydom?

MR STRYDOM: No questions.

MR BERGER: I just have a very few questions Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes?
FURTHER CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR BERGER

MR BERGER: Mr Mthembu, at page 10 paragraph 16 of your affidavit, you say "They told us to take traditional weapons and we had to put red headbands around our heads so that we would be recognised and would not kill one another by mistake."  Why did you say there that they were red headbands if they were white?

VICTOR MTHANDENI MTHEMBU: You are white, Mr Berger, you will not understand what I am talking about.  We used to use white headbands.  I have explained here the colour of the headband that we were using, these colours were white and you will not understand and you will not know this.

CHAIRPERSON: All that he's asking you is, why is it stated in your affidavit, why is there reference to a red band in your affidavit?  Do you understand the question?

VICTOR MTHANDENI MTHEMBU: Yes I understand the question.

CHAIRPERSON: He's putting it to you that you referred to a red band, red headband, when in fact you told us that you had a white headband.  Now what he wants to find out is why, you know, you are referring to a red headband when in fact you had a - was it a mistake or what?

VICTOR MTHANDENI MTHEMBU: It might as well be a mistake but what I know is that we were using red and white headbands.

MR BERGER: Mr Mthembu, if it was a mistake why didn't you just say that to me when I asked you the question instead ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: We're not going to take this any further whether they were red or white, the fact of the matter is he says they used both of them.

MR BERGER: As you please, Chair.  Mr Mthembu, could you give the name of the shop from which you purchased your CZ83 in Vanderbijlpark?

VICTOR MTHANDENI MTHEMBU: I do not remember the name of the shop quite well, but there is a furniture shop and there is a furniture shop right next to - there is a gun shop right next to the furniture shop.

MR BERGER: Could you say what street in Vanderbijlpark it's in?

VICTOR MTHANDENI MTHEMBU: I do not quite remember the name of the street, but it is near the police station in Vanderbijlpark.

MR BERGER: Mr Mthembu, would you know that at the time of the attack of the leading members of the IFP who were staying in Boipatong there was a Mr Mkhize in Bapedi Street?

VICTOR MTHANDENI MTHEMBU: I have no knowledge of that.

MR BERGER: A Mr Khubeka of Majola Street?

VICTOR MTHANDENI MTHEMBU: I don't know him as well.

MR BERGER: A Mr Zimba of Majola Street?

VICTOR MTHANDENI MTHEMBU: I have no knowledge of that.

MR BERGER: Thank you Chairperson, I have no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR BERGER

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Ms Cambanis?
FURTHER CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS CAMBANIS

MS CAMBANIS: Thank you Chair, there's just one question.
	Sir, in response to the question whether there was a decision taken to protect yourselves from possible attacks, you said as far as you knew it was reported to the management of ISCOR and thereafter police began patrolling around the Kwamadala Hostel, is that correct?

VICTOR MTHANDENI MTHEMBU: Yes that is correct.

MS CAMBANIS: When did this police patrols begin around the Kwamadala Hostel?

VICTOR MTHANDENI MTHEMBU: They started patrolling since 1990 that is as far as I know.

MS CAMBANIS: So on the night of the 17th June 1992 those police patrols round Kwamadala Hostel were taking place, is that correct?

VICTOR MTHANDENI MTHEMBU: Yes, the police used to come and patrol, often times.

MS CAMBANIS: Thank you, thank you Mr Chair
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS CAMBANIS

MS PRETORIUS: No questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Brink?

MR BRINK: No questions thank you Mr Chair.
NO QUESTIONS BY MR BRINK

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well, Mr Mthembu we are finished with your questioning, you may now return to your seat.  We will now proceed with the remaining applicants.

VICTOR MTHANDENI MTHEMBU: Yes.
WITNESS EXCUSED

CHAIRPERSON: Perhaps before we get to the other applicants, would counsel need some time I suppose just to, you know, get their thoughts together and then perhaps we can kick off as soon as counsel is ready or should we take the tea adjournment at this stage and maybe come back at about quarter past eleven or eleven o'clock?

MR BERGER: Chairperson, I am ready so whenever it pleases the Committee, we can start.

MR STRYDOM: I'm not going to start, sir, I'm also ready but I think it's not a bad suggestion that we can take the tea adjournment now.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I suppose so, I think we should now take the - a short adjournment until about eleven o'clock and then when we come back we can then hear the argument in regard to the remaining applicants.  We'll rise and come back at eleven o'clock.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS.
ON RESUMPTION

CHAIRPERSON: It has been drawn to my attention that some of the headphones have since gone missing I would urge people who make use of these to make sure that they leave them behind on their seats after we have come to the close of these proceedings, thank you.
	Right, we've now come to the remaining fifteen applicants who have also applied for amnesty.  We understand that the victims have raised an objection to their application on the basis that their applications do not comply with the requirement of the Act.  It is only proper therefore that we at this stage, before going into the merits of the applications by the remaining applicants, that we should deal firstly with the question whether or not these applications comply with the Act.  In that regard, the legal representatives will then submit argument to this Committee and hopefully at the end of the argument, we will be able to make a decision as to whether or not these applications can be heard on their merits.  Mr Berger, you lead the fight.

MR BERGER: Thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: And you can assume that we've read your heads of argument and that we are, speaking for myself, I am familiar with the authorities but perhaps my colleagues may want you to deal with some of the authorities that you want to refer to and I suppose that when they do so, they will indicate.

MR BERGER: Thank you, Chairperson, I do not intend to have a very long argument and ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: In fact let me ask you this - the issue that you're raising is that the applications do not comply with the requirements of the Act in the sense that there were only two pages, were initially filed on the 10th May 1997 which were not deposed to by these applicants and that the full and complete applications were only submitted to the TRC on the 13th February 1998 - you have in essence, the point - the argument?

MR BERGER: That is in essence the argument, Chairperson, but if I could just by way of introduction state that what we have before us at the moment in the bundles are fifteen applications as you correctly point out, Chairperson, which were submitted only in February of 1998.  Those are fresh applications, they start the proceedings from the beginning.  There is no question or no reference in any of these applications, the ones that are before the Committee that they refer in some way to the applications which were lodged in May 1997.  So the first point I want to make is that they are fresh applications.

CHAIRPERSON: What about the numbers?  What about the numbers?  Don't these numbers refer to the earlier application?

MR BERGER: If one looks at page 45, that AM number?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR BERGER: Well, Chairperson, I don't know when that number was placed on that document.

CHAIRPERSON: But no, I'm just dealing with the notion that there's no reference to earlier applications but what I'm saying is that - did they not bear the same number that occurs in the earlier applications?