Amnesty Hearings — East London — 1996-11-12

ADV DE JAGER: You asked him at the end of his evidence whether Jakavu is a co-applicant, Archie-booi is Jakavu's brother-in-law, could you kindly tell us what is the relevance of that?

MR NOTSHE: Mr Chairman the witness, Jakavu actually is the witness I intend leading.  All I intend leading before this Committee is the evidence of Jakavu to say that, he'll be saying that he got there, at the scrapyard, he heard that one of the people who was burning was his brother-in-law and although he was his brother-in-law he said that because of what it was alleged he had been involved in, he could not stop or intervene on his behalf.  Then it will be my argument that that also adds to the pot which indicates that the whole act was a politically motivated act. I just need to lead the evidence on that aspect only.  Thank you Mr Chairman.

ADV DE JAGER: Have you got a statement from him?

MR NOTSHE: I do have a statement from him, but the part that should be covered by the witness is not contained in the statement, it's additional to the statement.  But we have agreed with Mr Brink that they are not disputing that part, and that part being that this witness, Mr Jakavu, who is applicant 132/96 was the brother-in-law of one of the deceased, namely, Archie-booi Swartland.

SISI KHAMPEPE: Come again Mr Notshe with the surname.
AMNESTY HEARING	TRC/EAST LONDON
12	B JWAMBE

MR NOTSHE: It's Archie-booi, and then the surname is Swartland.

SISI KHAMPEPE: Thank you.

MR NOTSHE: Thank you.  The members of the Committee will notice when I hand up this statement that on paragraph 18 of his statement he starts telling the Committee what happened.  He was told that the Killer Boys had been taken to the scrapyard, but on the way  ....(tape ends) ... and the deceased were already burning.  Then he would have added and said that he heard, whilst he was there, that one of the burning deceased was his brother-in-law.  And he was told why he had been burnt but he stood there and he did not stop the killing.  That will be the nature of his evidence.  Thank you Mr Chairman.
	Mr Chairman further, there are four other affidavits of the other applicants who did not give viva voce evidence.  May we hand those up and Mr Brink has copies thereof and he has no objections to our handing in of these affidavits.  The first affidavit then will be the affidavit of Mr Bongikhya Petros, he is applicant 130/96.  Then the second applicant - and then his affidavit may be admitted as Exhibit J.	
EXHIBIT J HANDED UP - AFFIDAVIT OF BONGIKHYA PETROS
	Then the following affidavit is the affidavit of Jakavu.  That is the man we intended calling.  May his affidavit then be admitted as Exhibit K.  That is 132.
EXHIBIT K HANDED UP - AFFIDAVIT OF MANDLENKOSI JAKAVU
	The following ones 132/96 then should be Exhibit K.  The next one will be the affidavit of Mbuyisilo Klaas, applicant 133/96 can be admitted as Exhibit L.
EXHIBIT L HANDED UP - AFFIDAVIT OF MBUYISILO KLAAS
AMNESTY HEARING	TRC/EAST LONDON
13	B JWAMBE
	Then the last one the affidavit of Zoyisa Sizani, applicant 137/96 may be admitted as Exhibit M.
EXHIBIT M HANDED UP - AFFIDAVIT OF ZOYISA SIZANI
	Those are the affidavits Mr Chairman and that is all we intend leading before this Committee.

JUDGE WILSON: ...closes the evidence you wish to lead?

MR NOTSHE: It does Mr Chairman.

JUDGE WILSON: Mr Brink do you wish to lead any evidence on this aspect of the case?

MR BRINK: I don't propose calling evidence Mr Chairman.

JUDGE WILSON: Well that seems to me to terminate the necessity for a hearing.  We would of course welcome argument on behalf of the applicants and reply by you Mr Brink.  It seems to me, and I have consulted my brethren on this, the most sensible way of doing this would be to ask you to submit written argument.  If you would submit written argument on behalf of the applicants Mr Brink will reply to that and you will have a further right of reply.

MR NOTSHE: As it pleases Mr Chairman.

JUDGE WILSON: How long do you need to submit your written argument?

MR NOTSHE: Today is Tuesday ...(intervention)

JUDGE WILSON: The 12th.

MR NOTSHE: The 12th.  We can have them ready by Friday.

JUDGE WILSON: I think let's not be that optimistic, let's say by the 20th.

MR NOTSHE: The 20th?

JUDGE WILSON: Yes if you submit, file written argument on or before the 20th.  Mr Brink I don't know how long you will take to reply, should we say the 30th?

MR BRINK: Yes.
AMNESTY HEARING	TRC/EAST LONDON
14	B JWAMBE

JUDGE WILSON: And then the 10th of December if you wish to pray anything further.

MR NOTSHE: Mr Chairman do we file them with your original office?

JUDGE WILSON: The office in Cape Town.

MR NOTSHE: Oh do we file them in Cape Town?

JUDGE WILSON: Cape Town.  In this new age we live in there are courier services that take things ...(intervention)

MR NOTSHE: Is the office on E-mail Mr Chairman?

MR BRINK: I think so, but you could also - I don't know how long your argument will be but you could send by fax if you wish to.

BERNARD MAKGABO NGOEPE: We will see what we will do.

JUDGE WILSON: Well if you will keep in touch with one another.

MR NOTSHE: We will.

MR BRINK: May I just get that date correct then that our learned friend will give written arguments by the 20th of November.

JUDGE WILSON: You will reply by the 30th, and we will give them an extra day or - he can have by the 10th of December.  Very well that finishes the matter set down for hearing at the present time and I accordingly close the hearing.
HEARING ADJOURNS