Amnesty Hearings — Potchefstroom — UNKNOWN

<UNKNOWN>: : What did they do from your knowledge?

ANSWER: They were actually conducting a reign of terror in the township, killing community members, maiming some and gene-rally subjecting to the township to a reign of lawlessness.

<UNKNOWN>: : They killed David Majeko they informed this Committee that they did so and they were in fact acting under the auspices...

JUDGE WILSON: : They did not do so, one of them said he shot, the other one said he did nothing at all.

<UNKNOWN>: : As the member of this Committee is saying, we had to attitudes, William Fortuin who said that he was involved but he did not do anything and Johnson Ncube who shot at the deceased.   At the time they told this Committee that they were acting in their capacity and under the auspices of the ANC and the executive committee of the ANC.
1.	They /...
67	D NDZEKU
They were actually acting under command of their executive committee.

JUDGE WILSON: : Who is that?

ATTORNEY: The executive committee of the ANC Youth League.

CHAIRPERSON: : Just to get the thing in context did I understand the evidence wrongly, I got the impression that they said that they had no intention to kill this man, it is when this man came there with others who were armed and he feared that he might be killed that that is why he opened fire and killed the man.   He was not acting under anybody's instructions at the time because he'd not anticipated killing this man.   Is that not what happened?

ATTORNEY: Chairperson the question maybe should have been that when they were acting against the group generally, acting against the vigilantes they were acting as members of the organisation.

JUDGE WILSON: : The evidence was that on this day they were on their way home, you are now trying to put a completely different version as you did when you led the witnesses.  Will you please not put matters as fact, as you were now doing to this witness, the evidence we heard was that they were going home.   They had no intention of doing anything and this man rushed out of his house at them, is that not so?   Is that not the evidence they gave?

ATTORNEY: Chairperson that is the evidence they gave, it is when I refer to the actual commission of the offence, they were acting then as it has been described by the Chairperson, but like I'm saying the question should have been that when they were acting against the group of vigilantes generally so.   I accept the clarification thereof and I will refrain from asking a question in that
1.	fashion /...
67	D NDZEKU
fashion again.    They were armed, do you know where this group did gather their arms from Mr Ndzeku?

ANSWER: From the information that we had at the time was that they were donations which were made particularly among the informal settlement communities, whereby arms were then purchased through those donations.
MS ............:: Mr Ndzeku, the group that you are referring to is it the vigilante group or are you referring to members of the SDU, I'm a little confused?

ANSWER: The members of the SDU.

<UNKNOWN>: : So it is so that the community as you mentioned were in total support of these members of the SDU's?

ANSWER: Yes that is correct.

<UNKNOWN>: : No further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY ATTORNEY

<UNKNOWN>: : (Inaudible).

ANSWER: I was a secretary general of the branch.

<UNKNOWN>: : Was the ANC aware of the activities of the vigilante group?

ANSWER: Yes everybody in the community was aware.

<UNKNOWN>: : Was there any formal decision taken by the ANC at any stage about how they should cope with the problem presented by this vigilante group?

ANSWER: There was no formal decision that was taken.

<UNKNOWN>: : Was anybody authorised to single out members of this vigilante group and if possible, put them out of the way?

ANSWER: No.

<UNKNOWN>: : No such decision taken by the congress?

ANSWER: No.

<UNKNOWN>: : Did you have anything to do with the SDU?
1.

ANSWER: /...
68	D NDZEKU

ANSWER: Not directly.

<UNKNOWN>: : Are you aware of any decision taken by the SDU on how members of the vigilante group should be dealt with?

ANSWER: Not formally, I might be aware but not formally.

<UNKNOWN>: : Thank you.

<UNKNOWN>: : Mr Ndzeku you said you know Mr Fortuin and Ngcube, could you be specific to us and tell us in what capacity did you know them?

ANSWER: At that time in question there were members of the youth league, the ANC youth league in Kusong.

<UNKNOWN>: : And you did certainly did testify that you knew the deceased David Mayeko?   What is it that made you know this man specifically, what made him prominent?

ANSWER: It was the fact that he was notorious.

<UNKNOWN>: : He was?

ANSWER: He was notorious in the community.

<UNKNOWN>: : Would you say by being notorious you mean that he was a criminal in the area?

ANSWER: Yes.

<UNKNOWN>: : Did he belong to any political organisation or movement or body?

ANSWER: He did not belong to a political organisation but he was a member of the vigilante group.

<UNKNOWN>: : Would I be incorrect if I said this vigilante group of which he was a member was taking any member of the community, irrespective of political convictions?

ANSWER: We are (indistinct) were actually directed mostly towards the political activists, especially the youth.

<UNKNOWN>: : No I believe the Committee would like to know more about that, what makes you say that threats were directed against activists?
1.

ANSWER: /...
69	D NDZEKU

ANSWER: Maybe I would, it would help the Commission maybe if I would put the whole scenario in its correct perspective?   What actually happened was it was the end of 1989, there was a group of youth that broke away, actually defected from the ANC Youth League.

<UNKNOWN>: : A group of youth did what?

JUDGE WILSON: : Defected.

ANSWER: Defected from the ANC Youth League and then embarked, and then embarked on a reign of terror, terrorising the community, killing and maiming in the process.

<UNKNOWN>: : Do you know the reason why this group broke away from the ANC?

ANSWER: I don't know of any specific reason.

<UNKNOWN>: : You may continue.

ANSWER: Thereafter, what actually happened was most of the attacks were then directed towards the business people who in turn some of the business people formed themselves, organised themselves into a vigilante group with a purpose of defending their properties.   In the process the whole game changed whereby their attacks became more and more concentrated and aimed at the political activists.

JUDGE WILSON: : Whose attacks were these, the defectors from the ANC or the vigilantes from the business community?

ANSWER: The vigilantes.

JUDGE WILSON: : There were still the defectors from the ANC?

ANSWER: I beg your pardon?

JUDGE WILSON: : There were still a group of defectors from the ANC?

ANSWER: No.

JUDGE WILSON: : What happened to them?
1.

ANSWER: /...
70	D NDZEKU

ANSWER: What I'm saying was the group that formed themselves into the vigilantes were then in war against this small group of defectors, but in the process their attacks were not only aimed at those defectors, that small group of thugs, it spread over to include and to concentrate more on the political activists.

<UNKNOWN>: : Just for clarity's sake Mr Ndzeku, are you now saying that some of the members of the vigilante group were businessmen in the area, is that what you are saying?

ANSWER: Originally that was the set-up.

<UNKNOWN>: : Right, no as it went on, with the inclusion of the known people like David Mayeko, were there still businessmen amongst the vigilantes?

ANSWER: No, the composition of the vigilante group took a different turn altogether when they were joined by thugs such as the person you mentioned.

<UNKNOWN>: : Mr Ndzeku, when did this vigilante group come into existence, which consisted initially of business people?

ANSWER: That was early 89, early 90 sorry yes.