Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1997-08-04

MR SHANGWENI: Thank you. Sorry for that Mr Chairperson.  Mr Chairperson, it was well known at that time in Claremont that a political conflict existed between UDF and Inkatha supporters.  This was as a result of an attempt to incorporate the Claremont township to the then Kwa Zulu self-governing State.
	There was resistance to that effect and a committee was formed to oversee that process whereby Claremont residence were against the incorporation of Claremont township to the Kwa Zulu self-governing State.
	Therefore Mr Chairperson, in light of that conflict, the applicant found himself on the other side of the conflict, that is on the side of Inkatha.  His acts were committed in an execution of an order by Djamile who was also part of that conflict and he was made to believe and he believed ultimately that UDF supporters are his enemies.
	In respect of the killing of Zazi Kuzwayo, the statement of Begezizwe Alex Kumalo, at page 187 of the bundle, paragraphs 43 and 46 thereof, if I may read - paragraph 43 reads:
"During the planning, Maslanduna meaning Dalikolo Woodsworth Letule said there was a boy, meaning Msizi Jethro Hlope who was going to accompany us and he was to go to see if Zazi Kuzwayo was present and if so, he was to come back and tell us the position as to where Zazi was.
It was agreed that if Zazi was there and the circumstances allowed us, we were to carry out the operation but if he was there and the situation was not right, we were not going to act but instead we had to check how the place looked like."
If I may further take you to paragraph 46 Mr Chairperson, which reads:
"From Djamile's house, the hearse drove to Claremont post office where it was parked at a certain spot near the post office.  Msizi alighted as arranged and he went to check inside Zazi Kuzwayo's shop.  After a short period of time Msizi Hlope returned and he came to us in the car and he told us that Zazi was there in the office inside the shop.
Thereafter Msizi Hlope left us and walked away".

MR SHANGWENI: Mr Chairperson ...(intervention)

ADV DE JAGER: That wasn't the evidence of the applicant.

MR SHANGWENI: That is correct, I'm referring you to ...(inaudible)

INTERPRETER: The speaker's mike is not on.

MR SHANGWENI: That is correct, I'm referring you to the testimony - the statement of Begezizwe Alex Kumalo, a Caprivi trainee who has applied for amnesty and who has submitted this statement to the Committee.

ADV DE JAGER: But the statement contradicts your applicant's version.

MR SHANGWENI: It doesn't contradict in a sense that it confirms that the applicant did not take part in the killing of ...(intervention)

ADV DE JAGER: But the applicant said he didn't return to the car, he only had to give a signal.

MR SHANGWENI: Mr Commissioner, whether the applicant gave a signal or not, the fact of the matter is that he did not kill Zazi Kuzwayo, this is confirmed by this paragraph.  That "thereafter Msizi Hlope left us and walked away".  I'm reading it in that context Mr Commissioner.  Thank you Mr Chairperson.

ADV SANDI: I'm sorry, Mr Shangweni, bearing in mind the requirements with which an applicant for amnesty has to comply before amnesty is granted - I'm not sure what you have said so far - how does that assist your client, would one be correct to say that the applicant in all the incidents referred to, he was just a tool in the hands of Mr Djamile?

MR SHANGWENI: Thank you Mr Commissioner.  The appropriate words I think which I could use is, he was a political tool in a sense that he was made to believe that whatever he was doing was correct.  If  ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: ...(inaudible)

MR SHANGWENI: I think it's proper that the applicant's argument is ...(inaudible) in a sense that you don't have to say whether he was a member of IFP at a specific period or not, then if it was not then he falls outside the ambit of the amnesty process but we have to understand the conflict.  Had there been no conflict in Claremont at that period, he would then be finding himself sitting here as an applicant if there was no conflict. ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: ...(inaudible)

ADV SANDI: ...(inaudible)

CHAIRPERSON: No, there's no doubt about differences, political differences between the two major political persuasions about whether Claremont should or should not form part of Kwa Zulu.  I don't think there's any dispute about that.  	What you have to tell us or prove to us, is whether your client was the willing participant in whatever Djamile told him or asked him to do and for which he was paid.  Is that not what actually happened?

MR SHANGWENI: That is correct Mr Chairperson, the applicant was willing in a sense that he had differences with his brother.  He would have foreseen that as a result of those differences whatever he was doing was wrong but he believed in what he was doing and he continued.  He defied his brother and he even stopped consulting his father concerning clothing, food and so forth.

CHAIRPERSON: Was that not because he was being paid for what he was doing?

MR SHANGWENI: Mr Chairperson, the applicant was paid after he carried out other transactions, not that immediately in 1987 he was paid, he was paid because he was issued a certificate an illegal certificate as a special constable, that was when he was paid, not before in 1987 when he assisted Djamile in issuing IFP membership cards and writing down the names of those people who did not head the UDF stay-away's.
	In conclusion Mr Chairperson, at that period the applicant's involvement with Djamile, it would be appreciated that he was barely 16 years of age and it was easy for him at that period to have been influenced by either side of the conflicting parties.  If he was approached by UDF comrades, I believe he would have followed the UDF comrades but in ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: That is conjecture, that is pure conjecture isn't it?  He followed this particular course because they were tenants of Djamile.  Djamile must have exercised some measure of respect and control over his father, the applicant's father and whenever he required the applicant, his father saw to it that, go to Mr Djamile he wants you to do something for him.  And that is how it came about, it didn't come about as a result of any political persuasion.

MR SHANGWENI: That is correct Mr Chairperson, but I'm trying to put the whole problem into a particular context that he'd been approached - I still maintain Mr Chairperson - by UDF comrades or if he was from a UDF family, he wouldn't have done what he did.
	I am saying that statement in that context Mr Chairperson.  In his case he was influenced and he believed that whatever he did for Mr Djamile was correct because he was a figure, high political profile and someone respected in the community.

CHAIRPERSON: He would do whatever Djamile would ask him to do?

MR SHANGWENI: Yes Mr Chairperson, considering his youth at that time.  As he grew he accepted that whatever he's doing is correct.

ADV SANDI: Had Djamile not come to the applicant and ask him to do all these things he was asking him to do, would he have been in jail today for example, would he have landed where he is today?

MR SHANGWENI: Thank you Mr Commissioner.  I don't repeat the conjecture that has been mentioned by the Chairperson but I want to believe that, that would be the situation taking into consideration what's taking place in the townships.  You are either on the side of the UDF or Inkatha, that is a fact.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you mean there weren't people there in Claremont at the time ...(inaudible)

MR SHANGWENI: In fact Claremont was a stronghold of UDF.

CHAIRPERSON: ...(inaudible) either UDF or Inkatha ...(inaudible)

MR SHANGWENI: There are people who did not belong to either UDF or Inkatha but at that time he was youth, I would understand a person like Msizi's father who was old.