Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-11-18

JULIA ARENSI FERRERO: No, I was in the village as close as possible to them because that was the nearest place there I could find employment because I had been in Johannesburg prior to this and because of my parents failing strength and they had nobody in the family that was nearby that could assist them, I had planned to come back and be as close as possible and try to get them out of the farm and into the village at least because they were used to their surroundings and they were quite resistant to change.  That's why I came into the village.

MR MAPOMA: I didn't hear you, who was quite resistant to change?

JULIA ARENSI FERRERO: The old people were resistant to change.  You know, old people are not very easily removable, they're not people that can be removed easily from where they reside.  As they grow older they become resistant to change.

MR MAPOMA: I see.  Now when, I suppose from what you have just said the guns which were stolen before the incident, they were stolen through burglary, am I correct?

JULIA ARENSI FERRERO: I would assume that it was burglary and we did believe that it was burglary.

MR MAPOMA: Yes, now other than those guns was there anything that was stolen on that day that the guns were stolen?

JULIA ARENSI FERRERO: No, not that I know of, just the guns were taken.

ADV SANDI: If I can just ask, when was the burglary, how soon was it before the actual attack?

JULIA ARENSI FERRERO: The burglary was in December 1992.

MR MAPOMA: Thank you Chairperson, I've got no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MAPOMA

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much Mr Mapoma.  Has the Panel got any questions?

ADV SANDI: Just one.  Mr Mtola, are you able to estimate his age, what was he more or less?

JULIA ARENSI FERRERO: Yes, Mr Mtola was about 60, he had just reached 60 and because I remember my dad was trying to negotiate an old age pension scheme for him.

ADV SANDI: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Reddy, any re-examination?

MS REDDY: No Mr Chairperson, no re-examination.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, are you calling any other witnesses?

MS REDDY: No Mr Chairperson, that's all.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.  Mrs Arensi, you are excused, thank you very much.
WITNESS EXCUSED

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Loonat, have you got any submissions?

MS LOONAT: Just my final address Chairperson.
	Mr Chairperson, members of the Committee, my learned colleagues, ladies and gentlemen, one has to admit that there was a common purpose attack on that particular day to commit the crime which was motivated by the volatile political situation existing at the time.  On page 19 of the bundle the learned judge states, line 6, that:
"Something was taken from the house but what it was nobody is sure of."
My client has in full disclosure has admitted to what he took and why and what he knew what the others could have taken, the co-perpetrators could have helped themselves to.	Essentially my client has confirmed that firearms and ammunition was what was removed and the victims' daughter has confirmed that and no more.

ADV BOSMAN: Ms Loonat, as I understood the witness she confirmed that on the first occasion, no more than the firearms were taken, not on at the time of the incident.

MS LOONAT: I beg your pardon, I understood that at the day of the incident it was just the firearms and thereafter a lot of livestock and things were taken.  I'm mistaken am I?

ADV BOSMAN: No, she did say that the livestock was taken thereafter but she did not say that nothing more than a gun was taken on the day of the incident.

MS LOONAT: Thank you.  My instructions are that firearms for the cause, to counteract the incessant IFP attacks on my client's area and people was the sole purpose of the attack on that day.  Mrs Ferrero was killed on instructions by the leader on that day, Mr Mduduzi.  The murder was not a part of their plan from the outset, but in such situations panic and the ingraining of having to follow orders from comrades and people superior to you in the cause was what my client did when he killed Mrs Ferrero.  He had the choice, it was either to kill her or be killed.  What was his option?  He obtained firearms and pump guns and the purpose of the attack as I said was purely political but certainly innocent people getting injured, maimed, killed as it happened on that day.
	His remorse has been expressed.  The mens rea for murder has not been ascertained but to obtain firearms.  He been honest in answering his questions to the best of his ability and he volunteers to implicate his co-perpetrators as best as he can.  His intention today is for the truth and full disclosure and hopeful reconciliation and in the light of the above I ask that the Honourable Members of this Committee consider my client's application for amnesty.  Thank you.

ADV SANDI: Can I just ask something here?  Three old people are killed by a group of armed ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Two are killed.

ADV SANDI: Three.

CHAIRPERSON: No, two.  Do you understand this position correctly Ms Loonat?  The wife of the farmer and the person who was living with them were killed by the attackers.  The farmer survived this incident but he died subsequently from some unrelated cause.

MS LOONAT: That is my understanding as well.

CHAIRPERSON: The farmer doesn't seem to have been killed or harmed in this, physically harmed in this incident.

MS LOONAT: That is how I understand it Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Alright, then I'm with you.

ADV SANDI: But we're not dealing here with a situation of victims who could hardly put up any resistance to these armed young men.  What was the political objective for the killing of these people?

MS LOONAT: My instructions are it was, my client was led to believe as part of his meetings with his comrades that these people were known to be supplying firearms to the opposing party and the idea was get those firearms.  One, to obtain it for their cause and two, to stop them giving it to the IFP who were attacking them and the question of the ages of the people.  At the outset my client has been admitting that there was o intention to kill the old people it was merely to get the firearms and get out of there.

ADV SANDI: Yes but he says when he shot Mrs Ferrero he was acting under compulsion.  Can he have a political objective?  Can he have an objective in his mind if he was just doing this thing because he was scared of Mduduzi?  He was afraid of Mduduzi?

MS LOONAT: My submission is that he was in a frame of mind of a political attack on this place and he was to take instructions from his senior.  Admittedly the instruction to murder a helpless old lady is because Mduduzi would be recognised by him, is not a political act but it was a common purpose thing and this happened in the course of the events.

ADV SANDI: His evidence does not, as I understand it, does not really show any compelling necessity to kill them whilst they were there.  They had been there the previous time, they got four firearms, they come back they get one firearm, they're not satisfied, they search the house, they don't find any firearms, they still kill Mrs Ferrero?

MS LOONAT: My instructions are that he had the choice, he was afraid of Mduduzi, he was his senior and at that time he didn't think further than which was his instructions, kill or he knew would be killed by Mduduzi himself.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Reddy, have you got any submissions?