Amnesty Hearings — Durban — UNKNOWN

DJ MKHIZE: Let me put it this way Mr Ngubane: at the time we had realized that we were fools; we were used.  The moment we started realizing that we were fools, the first thing that came to mind was that I have wronged people.  I'm just wondering how am I going to reconcile with them.  Once you realize that you are wrong, that's the first thing that comes to mind.  How am I going to look the people in the eye?  And therefore the question of reconciliation cannot be separated from asking for amnesty.  It cannot be separated from full disclosure.  One cannot separate reconciliation and full disclosure, because if there is no full disclosure, reconciliation cannot take place.  Because there has to be a basis on which people reconcile.

MR NGUBANE: Well, I know that in terms of the law that is the position.  The thing that I was interested in is when you made a decision to disclose your offenses, at that time what was of prime importance to you, was to get out of trouble.  Is that correct?

DJ MKHIZE: Not necessarily to find oneself out of the problem.  I'd like to refer you back a little bit to my affidavit.  I did indicate that I am not co-operating for the first time here.  I co-operated from the time of the trial in court.  First of all we adopted a system during our case that we were going to maintain our silence so that the Court should continue leading evidence.  And the Court led its evidence; we did not deny anything.  We were just silent until the Court came to the judgment and we were sentenced without having said a thing.
	Now if you look at this very carefully, you will realize that our silence, not trying alibi's or refuting statements in court, suggests that we had already realized that we were wrong.  We had realized that there will come a time where the truth would have to out.
	Because had we not realized at the time, we would refute some statements and testimony.  Some of the cases for which I am sentenced today here would not have sent me to jail.  And that is the position.
	There is quite a lot of evidence that was not available at court, but we did not refute that.  And when we started opening our mouths, we started divulging the truth and exposing everything.

MR NGUBANE: So today you have said that full disclosure and an apology to the people are interwoven.  I was pursuing this line of cross-examination because the impression that you created to me yesterday was that amnesty was not of prime concern to you, but what was of prime concern to you was to apologize to the families and face the families.  That was not entirely correct.  Is that right?

DJ MKHIZE: Even though I do not quite follow the question Mr Ngubane, but I did say in this forum that the main, important thing is not necessarily to ask for amnesty.  I said firstly it's to help the youths so that they do not find themselves in the same trap.  They should know how these things happen.  So that this government should not find itself in the same predicament.
	And secondly I said we should expose ourselves, divulge the truth to the wronged families so that they get to know how their loved ones and next of kins died.
	Thirdly we therefore would like to ask for amnesty from the Commission.

MR NGUBANE: Let's turn now to your income.  You have told us that when you were conducting your activities, you had a double salary; firstly as a Caprivian and secondly as a policeman.  Is that correct?

DJ MKHIZE: Are you referring to the time when I was at Esikhawini?  Or are you talking about the time when we had already started the hit squad?  I do not quite follow the question.  Would you please repeat?

MR NGUBANE: That's how I had understood your evidence, but if I am wrong, I am prepared to correct it.

CHAIRPERSON: You said at one stage Mr Mkhize that you'd received a double salary.  You received a salary from two sources.  Is that correct?

DJ MKHIZE: That was not the time at which I was at Esikhawini.  I did not get two salaries when I was at Esikhawini after having been trained as a police.  That means that from the time of July the 1st 1989 I never again received two salaries.  And the two salaries was happening at the time when I was at Pietermaritzburg deployed at the SAP.  We were paid as special constables and Caprivians.  I had not received training as a police at the college.  I had not undergone police training.  That is when I left Maritzburg.  I stopped then to receive two salaries.
	On arrival at Esikhawini I no longer continued to receive two salaries.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  Sorry Mr Ngubane, you can proceed.

MR NGUBANE: Thank you, thank you.  Thank you for that clarification.  How much were you earning as a policeman at Esikhawini whilst you were doing these activities, this hit squad activities?

DJ MKHIZE: Even though I cannot still remember very well, but I think my gross salary was around R2 100 and some change at the time when I was at Esikhawini.  That was the kind of salary that I received at the time of my arrest.

MR NGUBANE: Well, would it be fair then to suggest that after tax deductions and all that your salary would be in the region of about R1 500.  Is that correct?

DJ MKHIZE: Yes, I would think so.  I shall think that it would range around R1 300 or so.

MR NGUBANE: Now you testified yesterday that in the areas of Inkatha people were made to pay money in order to sustain the day to day life of the Caprivians.  Is that correct?

DJ MKHIZE: Mr Ngubane is talking about tax payers now.

MR NGUBANE: No, no.  I mean the money which I can refer to as the protection fee in the Inkatha area paid by ordinary people to the leadership, to sustain the lives of the Caprivians.

MR WILLS: Mr Chairperson, I'm very sorry to interrupt Mr Ngubane, but I think the question is slightly misleading.  My understanding of the evidence of Mr Mkhize yesterday was that this money was collected from the community not to sustain the Caprivians, but as a protection fee, to protect the community.  I think that there is a difference.  That is my recollection of the evidence.  Possibly that's...

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.  Mr Wills, I must say my recollection is that people were obliged to pay an amount.  I wasn't under the impression or I didn't get the impression that all that amounts specifically went to the so-called Caprivians.  But perhaps you can ask around on that what the purpose of that money was Mr Ngubane and get clarity from the witness at this stage.

MR NGUBANE: Thank you Mr Chairperson.  It's just that I picked it up in Zulu when he said that it was used to maintain the boys.  So I assumed that it was the Caprivians.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes well, I would have missed that then.  But perhaps you can ask, thanks.

SISI KHAMPEPE: And I think Mr Ngubane it was in relation to his hit squad members, which included not only Caprivians but other people who were recruited who are not Caprivians.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.  Thank you.  Right.

DJ MKHIZE: I would like to explain this.  I realized that the Judges as well are similarly confused.  I did not say the moneys were meant to sustain the livelihood of the Caprivians.  I was not only referring to the IFP as a movement.  What I said yesterday was that these political movements in their different areas and sections, they had a tendency to collect moneys from the community.
	Not only the IFP.  This was a common practice, to collect money from the communities so that for example within the IFP they would refer to the people collecting the money as "utheleweni".  They would actually refer to themselves as the ones who protect the community.  The moneys would therefore be used to buy arms, ammunitions and some traditional herbs for protection.
	I did not say that these moneys were used to sustain the Caprivians because they were protecting people.  No, I did not say that.