Amnesty Hearings — Sebokeng — 1998-07-06

MR BERGER: Chairperson, as far as the first point is concerned, the applications, I understood that we were attempting to get the entire paper trail from the time that the applications were originally sent in which was on the 10th May 1997 until the real applications, if I can call them that, were submitted which was in 1998.  All we've received so far is the original letter which was faxed through on the 10th May 1997 as well as the original application, the first application that was faxed through.  We haven't received the other documents in the paper trail and if it's not proposed to tender them, well then we will argue on that basis, that's alright with us.  Our stance is clear, that is that the applications are not valid applications this is but for Mr Mthembu's application, they're not valid applications because they don't comply with the requirements of the Act.  The applicants legal representatives know that that is our position and if they have any documents which can shed light on it, so be it.  If the documents are only those documents which we have before us, well then we will argue on the basis that those are the only documents which exist and we will make our argument in that regard.  The only point I'm making is that the full paper trail has not been revealed, if it's not going to be revealed, we will argue on that basis as well, that's fine.
	The second point, Chairperson, is that Mr Brink said that we had a blanket opposition to amnesty.  That's strictly speaking not correct.  What we said was that we will oppose on the three bases set out in Section 20, Sub-Section 1 of the Act and in particular, in so far as acts associated with a political objective are concerned, we will oppose on that basis within the meaning of Section 21 and 23 of the Act.  We're not saying that there was no conflict, we're not going to argue there was no conflict of any nature.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, as I understand what Mr Brink is saying, it is simply that the objectors intend opposing the application on much broader basis that the criteria set out in the Act for the granting of the amnesty has not been satisfied.

MR BERGER: Yes, then he's correct, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: I don't think that he goes further than that to suggest that there wasn't any conflict.

MR BERGER: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: That's how I understand the - is that right Mr Brink?

MR BRINK: With respect, you're completely correct, yes.

MR BERGER: Then I have nothing further.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR BRINK: Mr Chair, may I just enquire from my learned friend, Mr Berger, does he accept that the applications and I'm not talking about Mr Mthembu's application, does he accept that the other applications were in fact received by the Amnesty Committee in Cape Town on the 10th May or not or does he require evidence to be called by the Executive Officer - Executive Secretary?

CHAIRPERSON: I think, Mr Brink, these matters which perhaps you should take up with Mr Berger once we have adjourned so as to find out the precise basis upon which the objection is being raised in regard to the remaining applications but I think that the point he has made so far that they are not yet in receipt of all the, what he described as the paper trail.

MR BRINK: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: I think you have to sort that out.

MR BRINK: I'm sorry Mr Chairman, the point is and I don't suggest he is not entitled to argue, all I want to know is whether he accepts for the purpose of the argument which he will raise, whether he accepts that those incomplete applications were received on the 10th May, that's obviously without prejudice to argue the matter.

CHAIRPERSON: Well that is precisely what I'm telling you and that is you'd have to discuss that with Mr Berger.

MR BRINK: You don't want it on record.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well.  It is unfortunate that these proceedings cannot proceed at this stage but in view of the application that has been made by Mr Berger who represents 86 victims, there can be no question that the victims are entitled and indeed have the right to be represented at these hearings because the decision which this Committee might make might well effect their right.  In these circumstances the Committee is disposed of granting the request by Mr Berger that these proceedings be stood down until Thursday morning to enable him not only to consult with the victims whom he represents but also to peruse the docket relating to the Boipatong Massacre which I gather is going to take place tomorrow morning.  However in view of the fact that we appear to have lost time it would seem to us that it's highly desirable that when we resume on Thursday we sit much longer hours than we had been planning to sit so that we propose that on Thursday we commence sitting at 9 o'clock in the morning.  Does anyone have a problem with that?
	The other matter which I want to place on record is that there are those of the applicants who are in prison and I have been informed that there are problems getting them here in time.  To enable this Committee to commence it's sitting timeously on Thursday, I would urge the prison authorities both in Pretoria Central Prison where the applicant Victor 
Mthandeni Mthembu is being held as well as the prison authorities in the Vereeniging prison where Tebogo Mgubane, Timothy Stals Masibuko, Jack Mbele, Sonny Michael Mkwanazi are held to ensure that these applicants are present here at least by 8.30 on Thursday and on Friday when we'll be continuing to sit.  Is there anything else you want to place on record?

MS PRETORIUS: No thank you, Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: And finally, I want to mention two matters and that is I would urge the victims to please cooperate with the legal representatives and make themselves available for a consultation so that we can make some progress and secondly I would urge the legal representatives to cooperate with one another ensuring that whatever documents they need from one another they make available to one another so that we can make some progress in this matter.  Thank you.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION:  9TH JULY 1998 - 3

CHAIRPERSON: Good morning ladies and gentlemen.  After a long delay we are able to resume these hearings again and hopefully there will be no further disturbances.  I want to thank you for your patience thus far.  Where is Mr Mthembu?  Is Mr Mthembu here?
	Mr Mthembu may I remind you are still under oath to speak the truth, do you understand that?

VICTOR MTHANDENI MTHEMBU: (s.u.o.)

CHAIRPERSON: Let me ask you to speak as loud as you can so that people at the back of the hall could hear what you have to say.  Do you understand that?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Berger are you ready to commence your cross-examination?

MR BERGER: Thank you Chairperson, yes I am.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well, would you proceed then?

MR BERGER: Chairperson, before I commence cross-examination could I just place on record that between Ms Cambanis and me all the families of people who were killed or injured in the Boipatong Massacre on now represented by the two of us.

CHAIRPERSON: We appreciate that Mr Berger and Ms Cambanis for which the Committee thank you for that.

MR BERGER: Yes, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Perhaps it would be convenient at this stage if a complete list of the victims could then be handed in but at an appropriate stage?

MR BERGER: Chairperson, that's already been done.

MR STRYDOM: Mr Chairperson, I'm sorry to interrupt.  Can I just also just place on record at this stage that Mr Sithembiso Khubeka arrived at the hearing this morning.  We have been instructed to appear on his behalf as well.  That is the person that applied for amnesty independently and there was also application through the attorneys initially by he has now arrived at the hearings and we were instructed to appear on his behalf.

CHAIRPERSON: Is his application before us?