Amnesty Hearings — Boksburg — UNKNOWN

SELENA MDONBISIMENGE MOTLOUNG: I went to the Peace Committee because I wanted my son's corpse and I couldn't find it.   The soldiers that I found at the bridge in Moleleki said they could not help me, except for me to go to the Peace Committee, they were told that there were seven corpses in Moleleki and it might have happened that the eighth was that of my son's, that is why I had to go to the Peace Committee, to ask them to help me locate the corpse of my son.

MR SIBANYONI: Right, finally, the applicants are saying, broadly, that during 1993 things were bad at Katlehong and more specifically at Moleleki, they are using the word conflict, they say there was conflict, and as a person who was staying there, you may also be aware of that conflict.  Now they're saying they did what they did in trying to protect the community as members of the SDU, more especially that Bulelwa was killed and their chairperson, Blanko, was killed.   Now all they were doing, according to them, were trying to protect the community.   Now that we are speaking about reconciliation, they are saying they're asking for forgiveness, because we are in a new era.   Would you still say you think they should not be given amnesty?

SELENA MDONBISIMENGE MOTLOUNG: I don't have forgiveness, because as they explained on my arrival, they're saying they have been suspecting the kids for a very long time, that they were criminals, hijacking and doing all sorts of things, and after killing Bulelwa and Blanko, that is then they took action, and they, as adults, have taken that action.   Why, if they were trying to protect the community, why did they not go to Peter Ngaba, discuss this with him, indicate to him that this is beyond their power, and indicate to him that since the kids had killed, something had to be done?

MR SIBANYONI: But do you concede that there was sort of conflict at Moleleki at that time?

SELENA MDONBISIMENGE MOTLOUNG: I have no knowledge, because I was not residing in Moleleki at that time.

MR SIBANYONI: Thank you, no further questions, Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Malan?

MR MALAN: No questions thank you, Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Motata?

ADV MOTATA: I've got no questions, Chairperson.
NO RE-EXAMINATION BY MR MAPOMA

MR MADASA: You say you were not living at Moleleki in December 1993.   Was Vips living with you?

SELENA MDONBISIMENGE MOTLOUNG: (Indistinct - reply not translated).

MR MADASA: Okay, thank you.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MADASA

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, madam, you may return to your seat.  Yes, Mr Mapoma?
WITNESS EXCUSED

MR MAPOMA: Thank you, Chairperson.   Chairperson, that is the version on the side of the victims.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Madasa, you indicated that there is a further witness that you wanted to call.   Would you just briefly indicate to us what the witness is going to tell us?

MR MADASA: Mr Chair ...(intervention).

CHAIRPERSON: Is it something that is new, that we haven't heard?

MR MADASA: Mr Chair, I'm in fact dispensing with that witness.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh.

MR MADASA: Thank you, Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.  Very well, gentlemen, Mr Madasa,  Mr Mapoma, are you ready to present argument?

MR MADASA: Mr Chair, I would request about ten minutes adjournment, and in the meantime may I hand over the heads to you, so that you can look at them during the adjournment?

CHAIRPERSON: Do you have sufficient copies of those?

MR MADASA: Yes, Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, very well.   Mr Mapoma?

MR MAPOMA: Yes, Chairperson, I would also request an adjournment of about 15 minutes, because I'm expecting a fax from Cape Town office of my heads of argument, after which I'll be ready for argument, chairperson.   In fact I'm expecting them at any time now, that fax.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, very well, the time now is about twenty to ten.   The time now, it's about twenty to ten, we'll dispose of affording you gentlemen 55 minutes within which to collect your thoughts and to come and present argument.  So we will reconvene at, well, shall we give you one hour, we will reconvene at twenty five to eleven, that will be one hour.   Okay?   Okay, we'll then rise and reconvene at twenty five to eleven.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Madasa?   You can assume that we've read your heads of argument and we understand the submission you're making, so you need not take us through them.

MR MADASA -: Thank you, Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR MADASA: Mr Chair, I would like to point out that I will simply refer to the applicants collectively, and except where need arises point out certain things in respect of particular applicants.   Thank you, Mr Chair.
	Mr Chair, I submit that, on behalf of the applicants the issues to be decided are simply as follows:  whether the applicants, when they committed the acts or offences in question, those acts were associated with a political objective, and whether they have made full disclosure.
	Dealing with the political objective, Mr Chair, Mr Chair I submit that the SDU, it is a well-known fact that it was formed as a result or consequent to call by ANC for the defence of the communities.

CHAIRPERSON: Speaking for myself, I do not think that there is any issue as to the objective with which the SDU's were formed, I think the evidence that was led over the past six days speaks for itself.   The only issue is whether the conduct of the applicants, who are admittedly members of the SDU and members of the ANC, had any political objective.   That's the one level.
	The second question of course is the one we've just described, namely whether or not they have disclosed fully the role they played in the massacre.
	So that I think one ought to separate the objective with which the SDU's were formed and the conduct of the individual members of the SDU in killing the deceased, because I think the issue here is whether the killing of the deceased had the objective envisaged in the Act.   Is it not the issue?

MR MADASA: Thank you, Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Ja.