Amnesty Hearings — East London — 1999-04-30

MS PATEL: Alright, let's talk about the Hansel incident first.  He was a sickly old man, he was alone in his house.  There were many of you who were going through his place looking for the firearms.  Surely in terms of your mandate it wasn't necessary to assault as grievously as he was assaulted?

BONAKELE BHAYI: Yes it was not necessary for him to be assaulted that way but we approached him and he didn't understand and the comrades then decided to assault him because they wanted weapons from him.

MS PATEL: Okay, was this reported back to Umfane Green or somebody else of the command structure as you state?

BONAKELE BHAYI: Yes from there we went back to the roadblocks so everything that happened they were reported back.

MS PATEL: Was there any feedback from the command in terms of how that operation had in fact been conducted?

BONAKELE BHAYI: I don't remember when because there were a lot of us and other people who didn't go to that operation were interested in seeing the firearms or the weapons so I'm not sure whether there was such feedback.

MS PATEL: I'm sorry, I didn't get your response.  Sorry, Madame interpreter, can you just repeat that for me please?

BONAKELE BHAYI: Whenever we came from an action we used to go to the roadblock to surrender the firearms and the people that were left behind were interested, they wanted to know or to see the weapons that we found so I'm not sure whether Umfane Green was there because when you're coming out of an operation you would be shocked so I'm not sure about what happened.

MS PATEL: Regarding - can you tell us a bit more about the group who had gone on these operations.  How was the planning done amongst that group before you embarked on an operation, was it done at the roadblock, were people informed about what was going to happen and who would be in charge of what as when you went to Mr Senti's house you were guarding the fellow workers' homes, can you just briefly enlighten us on what the planning was?

BONAKELE BHAYI: We were not told what to do, you just decide where to stand as you were there.  You would then see where to look for the enemy or where to guard.

MS PATEL: Okay.  If I can just refer back to these specific incidents that you've been convicted of?  Do you know anything about Mr Hansel's telephone lines being cut.  Was it part of the plan, were you present?

BONAKELE BHAYI: Yes it was part of the plan, it was our decision that the first thing to do was to cut the phone wires so that the farmer cannot be able to call out for information.

MS PATEL: Okay.  Alright, you've also been convicted of the attempted murder of Mr Cobus.  Do you by the conduct - sorry, let me rephrase that, that was not the intention when you went there, your cousin, Mr Rhandile Bhayi, has stated that the only reason that your group reacted in the manner that they did at Mr Cobus' house was in fact because he was shooting on them, shooting on your group and that you were all acting in self-defence.  Is that your position as well?

BONAKELE BHAYI: Yes that is so and even our shooting back at him, I don't think that we aimed at him but we were just giving him a sign that what he was using we also had it with us, the firearm was also with us.

MS PATEL: Okay.  Alright, the attempted - you've also been found guilty of the attempted murder of Mr Pretorius.  What do you have to say about that, did you reconcile yourself with the conduct of the other members of the group who'd in fact shot Mr Pretorius or did you feel that that was beyond the decision and the mandate of the community and that you're not willing to be a party to that?

BONAKELE BHAYI: The shooting of Mr Pretorius and Joe Senti was not the instruction that we received and that was not our decision but it just happened while we were there.

MS PATEL: And you don't have a problem with the fact that it just happened, you reconcile yourself with the fact that it happened in the way that it happened?

BONAKELE BHAYI: No I don't reconcile myself with the way it happened, the spilling of blood because it was not our policy to do that.

MS PATEL: Okay, can I ask you, given that you knew what the specific policy of the organisation was in terms of the specific operations and also the manner in which the first operation had panned out given that Mr Hansel was seriously assaulted and that wasn't part of the mandate given the drawn out attack on the old Mr Cobus which was also not part of the mandate.  Why did you still carry on with this group, why did you still proceed to the second and the third attacks?

BONAKELE BHAYI: The comrades that were there at the time I think they didn't know how to approach him so that they can get weapons and the reason why I continued in these attacks is because I trusted our approach although it failed.

MS PATEL: Well the approach failed after the first time, how could you still have had trust in the approach?

BONAKELE BHAYI: What I was sure about is that it might happen that in the next action what happened before would not happen.

MS PATEL: Okay.  There were other operations undertaken after Mr Pretorius and Mr Senti were in fact attacked.  Why did you not participate in those?

BONAKELE BHAYI: It is because I was harassed by the police and they also had my name so I was running away from the police, I was not staying n that township.

MS PATEL: Were you harassed because of your involvement in these incidents or was it for some other reason?

BONAKELE BHAYI: I was harassed because of the incidents that I got arrested about.

MS PATEL: Okay, now this specific mandate of the community in terms of carrying out these operations, can you tell us whether your co-applicants were aware of that, of the specifics of the mandate of how the operations were meant to be carried out?

BONAKELE BHAYI: I think they were aware because we were all in the meeting and we were told about not to kill or not to shoot.

MS PATEL: Alright.  Honourable Chairperson, I'm almost through but I've just been handed some papers that may be relevant, if I'm granted a short adjournment just to go through these papers that I've just been handed?  I believe they come from our investigative unit?

CHAIRPERSON: Where do they come from at this late stage?  This matter is being heard for the last how many days?

MS PATEL: I'm not sure exactly what the source is, Honourable Chairperson, I'll have to speak to them.  I was just handed the envelope now.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you done with your cross-examination but for this stuff or what is your position?

MS PATEL: Ja, I'm done but for this.

CHAIRPERSON: We would like to get this done and it is obviously unacceptable for the investigative unit to produce documents which we don't know whether they have anything to do with this case at this late stage and expecting you to interrupt the flow of the proceedings in order to study those things and so I certainly don't take very kindly to that and you can tell them that.  I'd intended to conclude the testimony of this witness, to then adjourn for a while to enable the parties to prepare their addresses to us and to come in and to take those addresses and to dispose of this matter so I very reluctantly interrupt the proceedings at this stage and I trust that if there is anything that is really important and relevant you will deal with it otherwise we won't have to suffer anything that doesn't really add value to the process.

MS PATEL: I'm indebted to you Honourable Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: We'll adjourn for a short while.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Patel, any further questions?