Amnesty Hearings — Umtata — 2000-02-01

MS DAMBUZA: That is what they're asking amnesty for, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: And does that include Mr Mazizi?

MS DAMBUZA: Mr Mazizi's application goes further to apply for amnesty in respect of the treason conviction.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes I'm sorry, I didn't make myself quite clear, I'm only limiting myself now to the January planning.  So the other three are asking for amnesty in respect of the conspiracy to commit treason and Mr Mazizi is asking for amnesty in respect of treason insofar as the November coup is concerned, and is he also asking for conspiracy to commit treason in respect of the January incident?

MS DAMBUZA: My instructions are not as such Mr Chairman, because he says he was not aware of what was going on and therefore was not involved and he didn't actively take part in that plan of the ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: So you're not applying for amnesty in respect of the January incident insofar as Mr Mazizi Ntisana is concerned?

MS DAMBUZA: No, I haven't been instructed in that fashion.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.  So the three is in respect of January and Mazizi in respect of November?

MS DAMBUZA: Mazizi in respect of - yes, Sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes thank you.  Yes, Mr Nodada, we don't need to hear you in respect of the clients of Mr Malan, if you have any submissions you could focus on the clients of Ms Dambuza.

MR NODADA: Thank you, Mr Chairperson.  Basically, insofar as the other three applicants, that is with the exception of Mazizi Ntisana, I don't seem to be having any problems.  But my main problems actually relate to the testimony of Mazizi Ntisana, as regards the full disclosure of the relevant facts that he's required to make.
	If one looks at his evidence closely, objectively as well, he wants to create an impression to this Committee that he did not know much about what was going to happen, but if one looks at his affidavit he states clearly that he had several meetings with Col Craig Duli who approached him, apparently immediately after he had been released from prison, he knew him very well, they had known each other since 1975, and he appears to be one of the persons who were aggrieved as a result of the military coup that was led by Col Duli and Bantu Holomisa, which led to the military council government in Transkei, the former Transkei.   And his dissatisfaction and grief actually emanates directly from the fact that he was a member of parliament of the civilian government that was led by Stella Sigcau and then he definitely must have involved himself in the planned coup which actually was led by Col Duli in particular, in fact it appears that he was also playing a leading role in the planning of that coup.  He gives the impression that although he had so many meetings, not only in Queenstown and East London where he fled and stayed, but also in Johannesburg and perhaps some other places.  But despite that, he has not honestly and openly told this Committee about the details of those meetings.  
	We are told not only through his affidavit but also from his evidence, that he is the one who was actually sent by Col Duli to make contact with the members of the TDF at Port St Johns.  He started with his brother, Mzwamadoda Ntisana and also he made contact with other members like Ndamase, Mxutu and others that were based at Port St Johns and at the Ncise base in Umtata.  And all that is being disclosed by him is that he just told them that Col Duli wanted to see them.  And this is also repeated by the other applicants who state that they were just told that Col Duli wanted to see them, and we are not told as regards exactly the questions that they must have posed.  I mean you cannot just be called by a man that you have known to have been in detention and subsequently released through a court order, who definitely must have reached a stage where he developed some misunderstanding with his Chairman, that was Bantu Holomisa at the time, to respond to a call when you owed the allegiance that you had taken as a soldier to the military government which was ruling at the time.
	And we also hear that he actually provided transport to Stutterheim, according to him, where the meeting was with Col Duli, but he does not appear to have been involved in the deliberations in that meeting and as regards what Col Duli actually said.  He seems to be wanting to take advantage of the fact hat he was a civilian and not a soldier and therefore he could not have taken part in those discussions and he knew nothing that was being said.  Yet, he clearly informs this Committee that he was going to be the leader of the second part of the operation, that is Operation Dawn, and he had some tapes that were in his possession.  He does not tell us what was contained in those tapes and what was going to be done, save to say that he was going to meet the four paramount chiefs and also four senior chiefs that were going to take over power as soon as the coup was successful.
	As regards the discussions that he had with Col Duli before they left East London on the morning of the 21st or rather, on the evening of the 21st when he was to pick up some liberation, the Lesotho Liberation Army members in Queenstown, he just skims over the events that took place.  And even as regards the communication, the constant continuous communication that he had over the radio with Col Duli, he wants to give the impression that well really there was nothing really important that was being discussed and yet that was actually the eve of the main event.  
	He plays the role of - whilst admitting that he was going to be involved immediately after the coup, he wants to give the impression that he knew very, very little and he keeps on telling this Committee that whenever he has to answer a direct question which would actually cause him to disclose any relevant factors, he decides to hide behind the statement that he was dealing with a very clever man.  He kept on informing this Committee that Craig Duli was a very, very clever man and he hid most of the information from him.
	Now he was a member of parliament, he gives the impression that he was an active politician and was very much interested to have the power returned to the civilian government and yet he involves himself in such a serious act of high treason without exposing himself to know exactly the details and what to foresee and what to expect as to the manner in which this whole coup was going to happen.  Like for instance, as regards the involvement of the South African Defence Force he was questioned directly as to whether he knew that the SADF members were involved, he said no, he did not know. 
	And he was taken further and asked whether even after the event, up to now, he has not heard that the members of the SADF were involved and when he was asked by Mr Mapoma, he denied knowledge of that until he was specifically asked by Judge Miller when he was referred to the involvement of Eugene de Kock, then he started disclosing that he had heard in the media that Eugene de Kock had supplied the arms to the people who were going to stage the coup.
	If I may just go back a little bit to the members of the Lesotho Liberation Army.  He gives the impression that those people were not armed, but up to the end of his testimony we do not seem to know what their involvement was actually going to be and what role they actually played, except for conveyed in his motor vehicle from Queenstown to Maclear and Tsolo and then back to Maclear and then back to East London.  In fact he does not even say where he actually left them.

JUDGE MILLER: I think he said he dropped them in Queenstown, then he ...(intervention)

MR NODADA: In Queenstown.  Yes thank you, Mr Chairman.

JUDGE MILLER: And he said he didn't see any arms and the one person was elderly, over 70.