Amnesty Hearings — Bloemfontein — 1997-09-04

ADV DE JAGER: Mr du Plessis, the learned member ...[inaudible] Judge Ngoepe, Mr Loots wasn't implicated in any offence as far as the going to Bloemfontein is concerned, he conveyed the message: "Go to Bloemfontein".  There's no suggestion ever made that he - that Mr Loots knew that he was going to Bloemfontein to commit a murder or do something illegal at all but if you carry on maybe you'll be - you'll succeed in proving that, I don't know.

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, the only question I wanted to ask ...[intervention]

ADV MEMANI: Mr Chairman, the other difficulty that I have is that a Judge has made a ruling that my learned friend is out of order and that if he wishes to continue this submission with these questions, he must make submission as to why he is within reasonable limits.  He chooses to ignore that and says he will explain later but he has not made submissions to justify why he should continue with this line of examination.
	Now I propose that he must make those submissions and justify why he should continue with this line of cross-examination.

MPHITHIZELI NELSON NGO: It's not a ruling Mr Memani, it's not a ruling by the Chair but obviously Mr du Plessis knows that.  That is the problem that a member of the Committee has and I am sure he will bear in mind, if he wants to proceed on the question of Venter, he will bear in mind my views.

ADV MEMANI: As the Chair pleases.

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, may I be afforded the opportunity to explain why I want to ask one further question to the witness?

CHAIRPERSON: Very well, what is it you ...[inaudible]

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, the only question or the only point that I would like to deal with, is the probability why Captain Loots would have sent Mr Ngo to Bloemfontein to execute this operation where Mr Ngo knew Mr Venter ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Are the probabilities not overwhelming, that Erasmus said: "the man to do the job is Ngo, let's find him and get him sent back here".

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairman, the probability turns around the question why a person who knows the victim and could be linked to the victim would be asked to execute the operation.

CHAIRPERSON: Because he can get into the house and sit down with the victim sitting peacefully in the chair in front of him when he executes him, as he did.

MR DU PLESSIS: Well Mr Chairman, we know about evidence of previous incidents such as this, exactly how the operations of the security branch worked and ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: And nothing whatsoever to suggest on the information set out here or anywhere else, that Loots was remotely involved.  There was no suggestion of that sort and you go on and on.  As Mr de Jager put, any moment you might step onto a landmine but let us not waste any further time on something that is totally irrelevant to your client.  You are here representing certain implicated parties and as my brother pointed out to you, we have ruled that they are entitled to be heard within reasonable limits, not to investigate the entire story.

MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you Mr Chairman, I accept that and I will then accept that I cannot ask any further questions about Mr Venter and I will not do so.
	Now Mr Ngo, can you turn to page - Mr Chairman may I enquire, does that also mean that I cannot put anything else about the version of Colonel Loots and Mr Bokaba to the witness about Mr Venter?

CHAIRPERSON: Well if they say they didn't send him to Bloemfontein, you can certainly put it.

MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you Mr Chairman, because I wanted to do that.

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible]

MR DU PLESSIS: Can I just for purpose of completeness Mr Ngo, please take you to the affidavit of Colonel Loots, page 44 - that is Bokaba's affidavit.  Let me deal with that first.  Have you got that?

MPHITHIZELI NELSON NGO: Page 44, A,B,C, bundle A ...[inaudible]

MR DU PLESSIS: Well, that is bundle B Mr Ngo.

MPHITHIZELI NELSON NGO: I have it Sir.

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Ngo, what I'm going to put to you is that Bokaba says in paragraph 3.1, he denies that he was ever involved in the transportation of yourself to Bloemfontein.  3.2, he says that he - he denies that he ever received instructions from Colonel Loots to effect such a transportation of Mr Ngo.  What do you say about that?

MPHITHIZELI NELSON NGO: That is not true, he transported me to Bloemfontein.

MR DU PLESSIS: Right, then if we turn to page 49, well it goes actually over to page 50, Colonel Loots says that he denies that he ever gave instructions directly or indirectly to you with reference to the Venter incident in Bloemfontein.  He denies further that he sent Bokaba - gave Bokaba instructions to take you to Bloemfontein and he denies that he had any knowledge of any operation in Bloemfontein at that time.  What do you say about that?

MPHITHIZELI NELSON NGO: I was instructed by him, he told Bokaba to transfer me to Bloemfontein.  Concerning the operation in Bloemfontein, really I know nothing about it because he didn't tell me that.

MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you very much.  Can we turn to page 43 of bundle A please?  Have you got that?

MPHITHIZELI NELSON NGO: I have it Sir.

MR DU PLESSIS: Do you see it is - it deals with the application of Louisa Mbongo, do you see that?

MPHITHIZELI NELSON NGO: I do.

MR DU PLESSIS: All right.  Now, can you tell us exactly what did you know about Louisa Mbongo?

MPHITHIZELI NELSON NGO: I used to know here as a member of MYO.

MR DU PLESSIS: Yes, and did you give any information about her to Captain Loots?

MPHITHIZELI NELSON NGO: I knew here through Bokaba?

MR DU PLESSIS: Did you give any information about her to Captain Loots?

MPHITHIZELI NELSON NGO: They knew about here already.

MR DU PLESSIS: So I accept you didn't give any information, you personally about her to Captain Loots, is that right?

MPHITHIZELI NELSON NGO: As I was monitoring her movements together with Bokaba to know exactly where she is and where does she attend the meetings, that is where we were involved and what was happening about her life.

MR DU PLESSIS: All right.  And exactly what was the instruction that you received pertaining to this incident?

MPHITHIZELI NELSON NGO: We were instructed to go and bomb their house.

MR DU PLESSIS: Why was that, why did you receive that instruction, do you know?

MPHITHIZELI NELSON NGO: She was problematic, she was a real problem.  At school she used to organise other scholars at schools so that they should boycott schools.  There were so many things that she was involved in, that is why when we continued reporting to Captain Loots, he decided that we should go back and bomb the house.

MR DU PLESSIS: All right.  And was that told to you by anybody when you received the instruction, was that told to you as the reason?

MPHITHIZELI NELSON NGO: What type of reasons?

MR DU PLESSIS: I'm asking, were you told that what you've testified now were given as the reasons why you had to bomb her house?

MPHITHIZELI NELSON NGO: They were real problematic because they were members of MYO.  The very same organisation of MYO was problematic.  We used to monitor them and report that to Captain Loots, to let him know exactly what are they doing in the township.  There we got instructions that we are supposed to go and bomb the house.  This was in connection of the information given to Captain Loots by myself and Bokaba.