Special Hearings — Mandela United Football Club Hearings — 1997-11-24

SIDNEY MUFAMADI: I think it is important to take the context really into account here.  The leadership of the Methodist church told us that the young people were kidnapped or abducted from the church, taken against their will to Mrs Mandela's residence.  Mrs Mandela maintained to us that they, namely the young people, came voluntarily because they wanted to run away from the situation where they were being sodomised.  Now these are two different versions.  We have no way of knowing in the first instance who was telling the truth.  If we knew that one of them was not telling the truth perhaps the route we would have taken was to informed (indistinct) been important for us to be advised as to what is meant by drastic action.  We spoke - we asked for access to the children.  From the information given to us by the leadership of the Methodist church we were talking about five children.  We were told that one of them is dead, which is where they claimed they got most of their information from about what happened to the children subsequent to them being taken to the house.  (Indistinct) particular person (indistinct) but when we went there we asked to see the children and when they were ultimately brought to us we noted that they brought only three.  But we couldn't just go there and say we thought there were five because we were trying to understand what is happening.  We were already told that according to Kenny Stompie was so injured after he was assaulted that he had been (indistinct) and Kenny feared the worst could have happened.   Now we are sitting there, Stompie (indistinct) there are three children, here for us their names who are you because we didn't know them.  And we know that none of them says I am Kenny which means the Methodist church could be right, Kenny has left.
We get worried, none of them says I am Stompie.  Then I wouldn't remember whether it was exactly in the first encounter but what the record (indistinct) is actually true that we were told that somebody, that Kenny had escaped.  I must say that we found it very strange, here are the children that come to Mrs Mandela's residence voluntarily because they believe that they are safer there, then one of them escapes.  Just one.  (Indistinct) when we personally (indistinct) Katiza started telling us a different version from what they told us (indistinct) and so on.  But it was at a time when we were questioning them one by one in the absence of (indistinct).  We didn't deem it prudent at that stage to confront Mrs Mandela with what Katiza told us because we knew at that stage in the absence of an agreement between us and Mrs Mandela that we were not going to take the children away with us.  If allegations of assault were true we could not guarantee Katiza's safety in that sense if we had said this is what he has told us.   We told the Commission in this submission that we are noticed what we thought were (indistinct) marks (indistinct) young people.  They said (indistinct).   If you look at the one report of Mr Tambo (indistinct) but we could not prove (indistinct).  But to some extent we were concerned about what we ourselves could do about the situation.  It is not inconceivable for instance that had we taken them ourselves against their will away from the Mandela residence then possibly we would have been charged with kidnapping ourselves.  I am saying it is not inconceivable because there are the young people (indistinct) why should we take them therefore away from a place in which they weren't (indistinct).

MR VALLY: Mr Mufamadi, whatever July 1988 you already know that there are some criminal activities being carried out by a group of young people staying at Mrs Madikizela-Mandela's house, on your own evidence, after the Daliwonga incident when you mediated the issue.  Number 1.   Number 2, a youth who has escaped tells you what has happened.  The fact that he has escaped is confirmed to you by Zinzi Mandela and you merely make a note of the fact that the word escape is used, meaning the people are not held of their own free will.  Number 3, you yourselves observed injuries on them.  Number 4, and this is where I go back to Bishop Storey's memorandum, page 4, the last paragraph.  Bishop Storey and Rev Verryn meet the Crisis team again at 3 pm.  This is the 30th January, the same date that you give for the meeting with the youth.  Page 4, the last paragraph.  Do you have it?   Okay.
"Bishop Storey and Rev Verryn meet Crisis team again at 3 pm and ask if they could give evidence.  Answer in the negative.  'We don't have a mandate'.  Aubrey Mokoena counsels very strongly that we should not proceed legally because we would lose without the evidence and Verryn would be the scapegoat.  Major concerns (indistinct) discussion in the safety of the remaining children.  Crisis Committee members more confident about this now because they believe they could no longer be armed because they were needed to establish case against Paul.  Nevertheless if anything moved too precipitously they could be done away with and we would be told they had decided to leave.  Also (indistinct) understanding of any action by the church (indistinct) informed.  Crisis Committee ... "
It goes on on page 5:
"Crisis Committee is (indistinct)".
What I am saying and this is what I meant by drastic action, why did you not support the Methodist Church, you people had first hand evidence, Zinzi Mandela told you about the escaping, the injuries, Cebekhulu and (indistinct) escape (indistinct).   Why did you not support them in their application for an interdict to restrain them from assaulting - Mrs Madikizela-Mandela and
the Mandela United Football Club as well as (indistinct) Stompie Seipei.   Why did you oppose the attempt by the Methodist church to bring an application on those terms?

FRANK CHIKANE: Firstly I think it is important to say this.  What we are talking about here (indistinct) that come (indistinct), it is not our (indistinct).   I wouldn't dispute necessarily everything that (indistinct) here.   I wouldn't remember for instance that at any stage when we were discussing with anybody we said we can't do that (indistinct).  We explained yesterday that we were not ourselves as this committee constituted by an organisation that would say we will give you a mandate to go to Mrs Mandela's house at eight o'clock and not at nine.   So we were acting we thought as the collective of the responsible (indistinct) in the community to try and help find a solution to a problem which we thought had certain implications, not just for a family or for a number of families that were immediately affected but for the community at large.  Therefore such discussions as we may have heard with the leadership of the Methodist church were not based on them making this request or that request and we say we accept this, we reject that.  We exchanged views from time to time about how the best possible way of finding a solution to the problem.   I put into this note here Bishop Storey is supposed to have recorded that we said or that (indistinct) in a discussions with us that the major concern throughout these discussions was the safety of the remaining children and I think I did say earlier that yes we were worried about the remaining children.  The point at which we were told about this problem we were told that Stompie was feared dead.  When we interviewed we were not shown Stompie but certainly our action had to take into account the necessity to ensure that they were secure.  The children that we were shown, and I am saying that in the course of further discussions possibly that we told them what we thought would be the best way to go about the problem.  But I think an impression should not be created that when they themselves thought about a better way of solving the problem we became an obstruction because I think that we (indistinct).