Amnesty Hearings — Umtata — 1998-04-20

MR NOTUNUNU: Thank you Honourable Chair.  I heard, Honourable Chair, I do have some questions, but I would like to be corrected on this, because I do not know the relevance thereof because the questions I have, are sort of proving that he was in fact an Askari as perceived by them, as perceived by them in this particular ...

CHAIRPERSON: Is the truth of whether the witness was an Askari or not, relevant?

MR NOTUNUNU: Thank you My Lord.  I don't know whether this is Honourable Chair and Honourable members of the Panel, whether this is of course for argument, because Matshaya has put it clearly that if he had been in the MK, and then you leave ...

CHAIRPERSON: That is a matter for argument.

MR NOTUNUNU: Yes, I think that is the matter for argument.  Well, in view of that Honourable Chair, my cross-examination would be along in fact, proving that what Matshaya had been saying was in fact correct, but if Honourable Chair and Honourable members of the Panel feel that there is just no need for that, I also want the matter speedily finished as possible.

CHAIRPERSON: The truth of the issue is not a big question.

MR NOTUNUNU: And that does not appear, with respect to, from the evidence given by even though I would have loved to ask him questions on that, but like the question of him getting some refugee status and thereafter coming to South Africa.  How can you then come to South Africa if then he had been given refugee status, all those things?

CHAIRPERSON: I think he did not dispute those issues, that was testified.  He has disputed specific issues.

MR NOTUNUNU: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Which to me doesn't seem to be real disputes.  But I will leave it in your hands, if you want to ask questions, feel free.  I am just pointing out that in my view it is not big issues.

MR NOTUNUNU: Necessary?  May I just take instructions on that Honourable Chair, with respect?
	Thank you Honourable Chair, I have taken instructions and the applicants feel that there is really nothing which is in issue because for instance, the things they want to clarify, not the things which are really in issue, or which are really of that importance in this application, and as such they feel that it will be a waste of time of this Honourable Committee to subject Mr Dyasophu to cross-examination, but the one thing I would love to say is the question of reconciliation on the part of the applicants.
	The applicants have said that and I do not think there is any reason for any person to doubt that to the extent that he ...

CHAIRPERSON: They can do that whenever they want.

MR NOTUNUNU: Outside, that is correct Honourable Chair.  Thank you Honourable Chair.

MR NOTUNUNU: .

CHAIRPERSON: I thank you.  Mr Dyasophu, thank you very much.

LUTHANDO DYASOPHU: Thank you sir.

CHAIRPERSON: You can step down.

<UNKNOWN>: .

CHAIRPERSON: I am going to adjourn for lunch now.  During that period, the two representatives can ponder as to whether they want to make submissions in argument or not.  We will take those arguments, if any, after the break.  We will adjourn.
COMMITTEE  ADJOURNS

MR NOTUNUNU: ... they were saying that the leadership was not doing what they were supposed to be doing, that was the holding of general elections etc, etc, so that at the end of the day, what was said by Mr Matshaya, that these people had said that they want to replace the ANC leadership, is in fact true.
	There is a person now who has been involved in such a situation, who had wanted to replace the leadership of the ANC, then he goes to, he is not satisfied with things inside the country, he goes to Dar-es-Salaam as he in fact indicated, that is Mr Dyasophu.  I am not really what Mr Dyasophu also go to Dar-es-Salaam, but the point I want to make Honourable Chair, is that they apparently had known, Dyasophu had apparently been granted some refugee status in Dar-es-Salaam, how then he happened to be in South Africa, Dyasophu, is difficult for anybody to understand.
	Matshaya had indicated that look, who had in fact, I was interested to know who had in fact organised the SABC television press conference, other than that there was in fact involvement of the regime in the whole thing, because that was the propaganda, that the TV, the SABC TV was used by the regime as a propaganda mechanism, so that the really coming out of prison that same day holding a press conference with the SABC, which is seen by millions of people over the TV, is an indication that these people were in fact the enemy of the African National Congress, which was then still waging the war of liberation of this particular country, of South Africa.
	They were then perceived, what is important here Honourable Chair and Honourable Members, I want to stress this is the test here should be subjective, it must not be objective, it must be subjective, whether these chaps were Askaris or not Askaris, it is immaterial.  What is important here is how the applicants perceived these people to be and ...

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, isn't it also as what is his name now, Mr Dyasophu says, where the leadership pronounces you an Askari, very definite consequences occur and he says that the soldiers in those circumstances, he himself does not blame them for doing what they did, because it was part of their duty.
	Doesn't that fall in line with what you are saying?