Amnesty Hearings — Johannesburg — 1999-02-19

CHAIRPERSON: ... two documents put before us, marked B and C.

MR RICHARD: Chairperson, I have made mention of those documents as I have gone along.  That is the letter from the Attorneys, Ismail Ayob and Partners or Associates to Dr Gluckmann, written I think on the 26th of January 1988 and the other is a transcript of the Day Book kept by the DPSC, relating to the 1986 detention.
	I thought that on the same basis as the news-clippings, the Commission might have reference to them.  They do refer to matters that have been mentioned in evidence.

CHAIRPERSON: We were told in evidence yesterday that he went to this firm of attorneys on about the 22nd of January and made a statement to them about his having become a police informer?

MR RICHARD: The statement he made and I have since spoken to Mrs Coleman, related to his activities in and about making the television documentary, not related to becoming a police informer on that occasion.

CHAIRPERSON: The woman who gave evidence yesterday, told us that.

MR RICHARD: Correct.

CHAIRPERSON: ...(microphone not on), and also that he was referred to the firm of Attorneys.

MR RICHARD: The witness Ntombi Masekeri gave evidence that she didn't take the statement, Mrs Coleman did.

CHAIRPERSON: Many detainees told us they had been treated cruelly, that they agreed to become informers because they wanted to released.  These people would be referred to attorneys so that they could make a statement that they had requested to be informers.  	The deceased went to Mr Ayob, who referred him there?

MR RICHARD: That as I understood it, related to the 1986 period of detention and the October arrest.

ADV SANDI: No, but as I recall the evidence, she said she saw him immediately after his release from detention and that was in January and when he disclosed that he had been recruited successfully by the Security Police.  There were other people around as well, but she did not mention who those people were.  And then for purposes of taking the statement, this was done by this person, Mrs Coleman.

MR RICHARD: Mrs Coleman took the statement and did the debriefing.  It is correct that he was ...(intervention)

ADV SANDI: That is in January 1988?  That is in January 1988?

MR RICHARD: But I don't believe it is correct to say that he was successfully turned as an informer, I don't think that was the import of the evidence.

ADV SANDI: It may be incorrect to put it that way, but the import of the evidence is that he had been coerced to agree to being an informer and he was not going to do that.

MR RICHARD: That is correct, but then I add on, that as I indicated yesterday afternoon before we adjourned, I would be in contact with Mrs Coleman.  Mrs Coleman cannot be in Johannesburg today, she has personal problems to do with an illness, but what she did say to me was that on that particular occasion, that is the 20th of January, the import of the police activity concerned the discrediting of the television documentary, but it is correct that on other occasions, including the 12 October 1987 arrest, efforts were made to turn him and it might well be that under pressure, he said "I would become an informer"  and then promptly went back to his comrades and told them what was happening.
	However, where I need Mrs Coleman at the moment is that the documents that she brought into existence on the 20th, when she did the debriefing, are now filed with the University of the Witwatersrand William Cullinan Library.  They are not precisely where they should be this morning, they are still being searched for.
	Once their existence or non-existence has been ascertained, what I will do is be back in contact with Mrs Coleman and as indicated yesterday, prepare an affidavit subject to the Committee's direction.

CHAIRPERSON: My notices to what was said yesterday afternoon that the witness said she saw him after his release, I think he said he had agreed to work for the police, this was on the Friday.  He said it in the office that he had agreed to work for the police.  He was sent to a lawyer on the day he was released and he made the other statement on that day.

MR RICHARD: Correct.

CHAIRPERSON: No mention is made in the letter marked C of a visit on the 19th or 20th.

MR RICHARD: The letter does not make mention of a visit on the 19th, 20th or 21st.

CHAIRPERSON: Carry on.

MR RICHARD: I believe that at this juncture, the best that could be done next is that Mr Zwane be called.

MR MAPOMA: Thank you Chairperson, I am calling Mr Zwane.

ADV SANDI: Mr Zwane, can you please give us your full names?  In what language are you going to testify, Zulu or Xhosa or English, whatever?

PULENG ZWANE: Sotho.

ADV SANDI: Can you please give us your full names?

PULENG ZWANE: Puleng Zwane.

PULENG ZWANE: (sworn states)

ADV SANDI: Thank you, the witness has been sworn in.

MR MAPOMA: Mr Zwane, is it correct that at some point, you have been an Investigator of the TRC?

PULENG ZWANE: I can't hear this.

INTERPRETER: The witness is on the wrong channel, I think.

PULENG ZWANE: I do hear now, can you repeat the question.

MR MAPOMA: Is it correct that at some point, you were the TRC Investigator?

PULENG ZWANE: Yes, that is correct.

MR MAPOMA: Where were you based?

PULENG ZWANE: I was based in Durban.

MR MAPOMA: From when up to when did you investigate for the TRC?

PULENG ZWANE: From 1996 up to 1997, April.

MR MAPOMA: We are here dealing with the applications for amnesty in relation to the murder of one Sicelo Dhlomo.  Do you recall that incident?

PULENG ZWANE: Yes, I remember it very well.

MR MAPOMA: During your investigations as the TRC Investigator, did you have contact in relation to that matter, did you investigate that matter?

PULENG ZWANE: Sure.

MR MAPOMA: Would you tell this Committee, how did you happen to get in touch with that matter and investigate it?

PULENG ZWANE: As I was the Investigator of the TRC, I was investigating the cross-border raids with the ...(indistinct) operations.  The intention of my investigation was not specifically the Dhlomo case.
	When the Dhlomo case came, during the process of my investigation, when I was investigating the attack in Botswana, Lesotho and Mozambique, I came across certain Security Branch guys who confessed to me that they took part in those cross-border raids.
	In addition to that, they even gave me information pertaining to a certain MK cadre who infiltrated their structures.  And then they mentioned that that particular cadre was also involved in the death of Sicelo Dhlomo.  And then I made a follow up on that MK cadre and then I came across him.

MR MAPOMA: Just there, who is the MK cadre you are referring to?

PULENG ZWANE: John Ithumaleng Dube.

MR MAPOMA: Now when you say they said he infiltrated them, what do you mean, would you explain that?

PULENG ZWANE: They told me that Dhlomo was working for, in fact he pretended to be working for them, while at the same time, he had links with the ANC.
	What I couldn't establish was whether was Dube their informer or was Dube the ANC informer in the Security Branch, but what I have established is that Dube had links with those Security Branch guys, but though he had also links with the ANC.
	The popular term one could use is infiltration.

MR MAPOMA: Did they tell you when exactly did he inform or infiltrate them?

PULENG ZWANE: Yes, he started infiltrating them after he was arrested somewhere in hospital, around 1991.

MR MAPOMA: After when?

PULENG ZWANE: Maybe after the new government came into power, but I was not interested in whether he was still an informer or not, I was only interested inasfar as when he became an informer and how was he was accountable or responsible for the death of Dhlomo.

MR MAPOMA: Now, when they told you that he was responsible for the death of Sicelo Dhlomo, what actions did you take?  I mean what steps did you take?