Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — 1998-04-20

MR BRINK: The next matter Mr Chairman, relates to the whereabouts of the next of kin of the security officer who was killed in these proceedings.  Mr Chairman, you will notice that the first applicant, that is Hlasa, does not seek amnesty in regard to the death of that security policeman because he was not involved, on his application but in any event I received a fax from the Cape Town office this morning, from one of the evidence analysts to ask me to bring to your attention that the Investigation Office were unable to locate any of the next of kin of that security officer and that the police docket which they obtained also makes no mention of him.  	It was suggested that possibly this matter be advertised as a way of tracing the next of kin but decided that that should not be done so we don't know the name of that particular victim or the next of kin, we just don't know.  That is all I can tell you in that regard.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, I was about to say something but it has escaped me.  Mr Brink before we get into these things, I think it beholds us to explain to the public why we started at the time that we are only beginning now.

MR BRINK: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: We were told that there was a problem about the sound system and the interpretation system as well.  We are not conversant with the technical details relating thereto but we understand this is the reason why we couldn't start earlier.  And for our part we should say that we are unhappy that we have been delayed to this extent and we sincerely hope that the situation was truly unavoidable.
	We should also place it on record that today, the 20th of April 1998 we are sitting here as a Committee consisting of myself, Judge Ngoepe and to my right, Advocate Bosman, to my left Advocate Sigodi and to my far left Attorney Malan and Mr Brink, you are leading the evidence isn't it?

MR BRINK: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Now to the matter that you raised earlier on about the family or relatives of the victim in the other incident, I don't quite appreciate, I thought the matter has been postponed in the Supreme Court or whatever Court pending the outcome of this application.  One would have thought that the office of the Attorney General would have some kind of information.

MR BRINK: Mr Chairman, the ...[inaudible]
MACHINE SWITCHED OFF

CHAIRPERSON: I thought I was talking about application by at least one of the applicants, application for amnesty in respect of the murder of a security person.

MR BRINK: Mr Chairman, Members of the Committee, in that regard Mr Hlasa is not applying for amnesty in respect of that, the other two applicants are together with the murder and the attempted murders of the other group.  Now they are awaiting trial in respect of that second offence or batch of offences.  They are not awaiting trial as I understand it, in respect of the murder of a security guard.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, maybe I'm confused.  Who is the security guard - let me ask this, somebody was murdered, he was going to deliver some other things or he was only delivering a vehicle or something ...[intervention]

MR BRINK: He was in the security van when the van was ambushed by a number of these people and he was killed.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR BRINK: Now, none of the applicants have been indicted in respect of that man's death, they've only been indicted in respect of the murder of that group of youths with who AZAPO was in conflict at the time.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, but isn't there an application before us by one of the applicants in respect of the ambush on that vehicle?

MR BRINK: Yes, you're entitled to deal with application, all I'm saying to you Mr Chairman, is that we have not been able to trace the next of kin of that particular deceased.  There were two batches of offences, one in July and one in August.  They are separate things entirely.  So two of the applicants, that's Mphoreng and Thandakubona are making application for amnesty in respect of the AZAPO quarrel and in respect of the security guard's death.

CHAIRPERSON: I know.

MR BRINK: ...[indistinct] indictment.

CHAIRPERSON: I appreciate that but you are saying that relatives of the security guard cannot be traced?

MR BRINK: They cannot be traced.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, how much effort was put into that?

MR BRINK: I can tell you this and I quote from the fax
"Despite all efforts made to locate the victim ...[indistinct] secondly, the police docket CR ...[indistinct] a number, makes no mention of the said security officer"

CHAIRPERSON: Can I suggest, can we start with - this will be subject to Mr Tloubatla's preparations or whatever, can we start with an applicant who is not making application in respect of that particular matter because we want to give it some thought.  We don't want to waste time anymore now, we want to give some thought about it.  We are going to seriously think about whether we shouldn't have it postponed or whatever.

MR BRINK: Then the second matter Mr Chairman, is that for some reason or another an amplified statement ...[indistinct] applicant already, the original of which I have was not copied and I ask leave to hand to the Committee a photocopy of that which I marked as page 17(a).  ...[indistinct] relates to the killing of the security policeman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you.  Mr Tloubatla, I suppose Mr Brink has finished what he wanted to say.

MR TLOUBATLA: ...[inaudible]

CHAIRPERSON: We are proceeding.  Call one of your applicants but it must be somebody who is not making application in respect of the killing of the security guard.

MR TLOUBATLA: ...[inaudible]
MACHINE SWITCHED OFF

MR TLOUBATLA: Mr Chairman, what I was still saying was that there are two separate acts, one committed in July, the other one committed in August.  Mr Hlasa is not involved in the act that was committed in August, I beg your pardon, that is in July, he was only involved in the murder, in the act that was committed in August.
	And the act that was committed in August was, they were all involved.  The three applicants were all involved in that act.  I wonder whether I'm making myself clear, that is the killing of some young members SOSCO or UDF, something of that nature.  The three of them were involved in that act.  It's just that Mr Hlasa is not involved in the killing of the security man, that is the only thing that he is not involved in.
	According to my preparation Mr Chairman, is that I was going to start with Mr Mphoreng, to lead him and in fact I don't think that there would be any difference if all of them were involved in the same thing Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible]

MR TLOUBATLA: Okay.

CHAIRPERSON: Where is the applicant?  Mr Hlasa?

PITSO JOSEPH HLASA: (sworn states)

MR BRINK: Mr Chairman, I notice that only one of the applicants has hearing apparatus.  The other two are involved in this matter and I think it's desirable that they should also hear the evidence to be given by Mr Hlasa.  I gather there's a shortage of hearing apparatus.

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible]
MACHINE SWITCHED OFF

MR TLOUBATLA: ...[inaudible] to give the Commission a background inasfar as the political situation at the time when these acts were committed, I wonder whether the Chairman will allow me to do so.  It's physically background information but otherwise the applicants themselves will give evidence on the specific acts for which they are applying for amnesty.

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible]

MR TLOUBATLA: Mr Chairman, I say that it was my intention, in fact I'm begging leave to do so, to address the Commission or the Committee on the political background which existed at the time when these acts were committed by my clients and the applicants themselves will definitely give evidence on the specific acts for which they are applying for amnesty.