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

<UNKNOWN>: was sliced into his chest with a pen knife and the words viva ANC was carved down his thigh.  Battery acid was then poured over his open wounds.  The second youth also had the words viva ANC carved on his back.  At a subsequent trial involving some people of the Club, the victims were unable to identify the perpetrators of the crime. It was however common cause that this particular act took place in the home.  The magistrate had incidentally said at the end that these two people had been so horrified, so scared at what had happened, that when they managed to run away it was understandable that they were not able to identify their assailants.
 Now in none of these cases was Mrs Mandela charged or called as a witness and this of course fuelled some of the rumours around her. 
 Now when the conflict and pupils at Daliwonga High School erupted resulted in the Mandela house being set alight while members of the community apparently just looked on, something had to be done to avert a full-blown crisis and the Crisis Committee which was comprised of MDM members was set up to tackle the problem in August of 1988 and there has been full evidence from the Crisis Committee on the activities.  
 Now I must emphasise that I am unable to give any direct evidence relating to the events around the Mandela home during the period in question, but my information came from several sources.  Firstly my capacity as national treasurer of the UDF, I had access to information from activists in Soweto.  Secondly as a partner in the law firm, Cheadle, Thompson and Haysom which at the time acted form the Methodist Church, I became intimately involved in the matter.  I had access to virtually all the material documents including key statements and affidavits.  My partner Fink Haysom and I spent many hours debating the appropriate responses to the crises.  I personally consulted with and represented Paul Verryn.
 My third source of information is that I interacted with MDM leaders constantly at this period.  One such person would have been Sydney Mufamadi.  There were certain objective facts around this case and there has been a lot of evidence over the last four days but to our mind at the time, and I'm not talking about hindsight, at the time there were certain in our view objective facts.  
 Firstly that four males including Stompie were forcibly removed from the Mans to the Mandela home.  Secondly they were viciously beaten at the Mandela home where they were kept against their will. Third, one young man Kenneth Kgase had escaped 7 January and reported his ordeal. Four, Stompie was not only tortured at the house, but then subsequently murdered in a savage fashion.  At best for Mrs Mandela Chairperson, at best for Mrs Mandela, she was aware and encouraged  this criminal activity.  At worst she directed it and actively participated in the assaults. Six, Paul Verryn was framed and seven, all reasonable efforts by the Church community leaders, Mr  Mandela, President Oliver Tambo to disband the gang of thugs by trying to secure Mrs  Mandela's co-operation had failed.
 By the 15th of February 1989 we were really at the end of our tether.  The principal resolutions of the 16th of January had not been implemented a month later and let us just remind ourselves what those resolutions were.  I was not part of the meeting.  I did not participate in it and I did not engineer any of the resolutions, but this is what the meeting said.  That when you be approached and be instructed to produce Stompie, that all progressive organisations should no longer give her a platform, that the Football Club be dismantled forthwith lest the community dismantle the Club for her.  That from henceforth she must desist from creating the impression that she speaks on behalf of the people.  That neither Krish Naidoo nor any other progressive lawyer in the country should act for her.  I'm personally uncomfortable with that fifth resolution because I think all human beings, irrespective of what crimes they may have been suspected of should have the best possible legal representative, but that is the decision that that community took.
 Now the Crisis Committee, and it is clear from the evidence as well that the Crisis Committee had become ineffective in the face of Mrs Mandela's obstinacy.  Stompie's body had been positively identified and our worst fears had now materialised.  The community anger was at boiling point.  Chairperson let me just stop for a moment and explain this boiling point.  The UDF had consistently over that period campaigned for the release of children.  They consistently campaigned around the brutalisation around the children in the townships.  We had gone, the DBSC had sent a delegation outside to Harare to tell the international community what was happening to the children.  So it was an extremely sensitive thing, forget the around this thing.  When I was released in detention in 1986, one of the first cases I was involved in was a case called State v Mahajane, where I tried unsuccessfully to secure the release of a 13 year old detainee.  We lost the case.  I was sickened by the judge, I was sickened by the courts.  What possible threat could a 13 year old be to the state, but that was the climate and that was the sensitivity.  And when I had approached, when I brought my own thinking to bear upon the decision we took, my professional life, my personal life and my political life came together.  I couldn't separate that.  
 So as the national leadership of the UDF then we realised that we had to do something and we decided to publicly distance ourselves from Mrs Mandela's actions.  And again I must emphasise we had very serious fears.  We were not sure whether people were going to march in the community on the Mandela home.  We were not sure whether the Daliwonga episode was going to repeat itself.  The situation was hot.  We weren't sitting calmly in some corner and playing political games and plotting, what do we do, who do we isolate, who do we integrate, that wasn't happening.  It was hot.  And that is the context that we are trying to explain here.
 I must say that for me it was one of the most difficult decisions I have ever made, but I think it was also one of the proudest moments that I can remember.  As time went on I have often over the last years, nine years had cause to reflect on that decision.  I hope that if I am ever confronted with having to make a similar decision that I will have the moral courage to do it again.  
 Unfortunately upon President Mandela's release from prison for Mrs Mandela the time had come to settle old scores.  She telephoned me one evening at my law firm after I had presided over a press conference at which Mr Mandela was present. She warned me to stay away from Mandela.  I wasn't able to pursue the conversation with here because the phone was put down on me.  
 Chairperson in concluding my statement, I would really want to make an earnest appeal to this Commission because this doesn't affect Mrs Mandela.  This affects us and it affects our future in the democracy in this country and in finalising this Commission's, in finalising it's recommendations, I think it should very seriously consider making a recommendation to the effect that anyone who has been convicted of having committed a criminal offence which amounts to a gross violation of a person's human rights should not be regarded as fit to hold public office.

CHAIRPERSON: Order.  Can you please desist, I give permission for applause and I think we should be quite serious about this. Thank you very much.  Now Hanif do you propose to, what do you want to do.

MR VALLY: From my perspective Archbishop I see Mr Morobe and Mr Cachalia as making a joint submission for the Mass Democratic Movement.  That's my position.

CHAIRPERSON: On to Mr Morobe?

MR VALLY: That's correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.