Amnesty Hearings — Mabopane — 1998-08-06

MR MASANGO: Well, that was the general discussion we were having about Molope.  He might have forgotten to mention that he actually knows that Molope was manning roadblocks together with Mokobojane.  If it wasn't Molope it was Mokobojane or both of them, but it was a general discussion.
	For instance, we might have discussed about his harassment of the students and the youth.  He never liked the youth, that's a fact.  We did discuss that together but he obviously didn't mention it here but that does not mean that he doesn't know about it or maybe he was telling lies about it.

ADV BOSMAN: What I'm trying to establish is whether this discrepancy or this, this is actually the evidence as it was given.  I thought I may have noted it down incorrectly.  But you also noted that there was a, as it were, a vacuum in his evidence which you think he may have forgotten.

MR MASANGO: Ja, I agree with you there.

ADV BOSMAN: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Advocate Motata, do you have any questions?

ADV MOTATA: Just one Mr Chairman.
	Mr Masango, how many times did you and your girlfriend visit the house in Beirut where Brigadier Molope was killed?

MR MASANGO: If I remember well we went thrice and I went there once on my own with the pretext that I was going to look for her.  That was in a two week period reconnaissance.

ADV MOTATA: And how many times other than the Saturday when he was killed was he present at this house at Beirut, within the two weeks?

MR MASANGO: No, it's only once, the previous weekend because he normally came over the weekends.  As I got the information from that woman he was supposed to have come that weekend and then we did go and check out, he didn't come, the Saturday, the Sunday too.  Well there I didn't go there with my girlfriend, I just passed that house to can see where the car is parked.  It had a shelter there, there was no car there.  That was a sign too, that was a sign that he wasn't in.

ADV MOTATA: Was it a normal sedan or was it a police vehicle which Brigadier Molope used?  At least if you can't remember say so but ...[intervention]

MR MASANGO: It was a sedan.

ADV MOTATA: And for his elimination you had to Mr Masina to get the go-ahead, as he was your commander?

MR MASANGO: That is correct.

ADV MOTATA: Thank you Chairperson, I've got no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: Advocate Sigodi, do you have any questions to ask the witness?

ADV SIGODI: There's just one aspect that I'd like you to clarify.  When Mr Masina was giving evidence he said that he went to Botswana to get the mandate to kill Mr Molope and when you were giving evidence, there is a vacuum in your evidence, you don't mention that after your discussions Mr Masina went to Botswana to get the order from the leaders.  You actually said that the leaders got the, were informed of the assassination afterwards, can you clarify that aspect for me?

MR MASANGO: Ja.  As a guerrilla unit there's our own way we are using.  It is possible, it could be possible that Jabu has gone there without our knowledge, that is possible.  I've done so many things that I was told in Botswana to do without the unit, even without Jabu knowing, so that is possible.

ADV SIGODI: In other words, as far as you know, to the best of your recollection that is how it happened, the leadership was informed of the assassination afterwards?

MR MASANGO: I got that from Jabu later on, after that, that he has actually gone to Botswana to get ...[indistinct] but he never told us.  As I say we were underground.  I mean for working together it doesn't necessarily meant that I had to know each and every step he was taking day in and day out.  He had to do his own things without me knowing it.

ADV SIGODI: Ja.  And as you were working underground, were you all staying in the same area or were you staying in different places?

MR MASANGO: No, we stayed at different places around Pretoria.

ADV SIGODI: At different places.  Thank you.

ADV MOTATA: Mr Chairman, flowing from what my colleague asked I would like to ask something.
	When you fell in love, with respect your wife not being here, with this woman and you came about to know where Brigadier Molope was also having an extra-marital affair, did you convey that to Masina immediately, that is Jabu?  That we know now where the man visits or that kind of information?

MR MASANGO: I did exactly that.

ADV MOTATA: Thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr van den Berg, do you have any questions arising out the questions that have been put by the panel?

MR VAN DEN BERG: None, Mr Chairman.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VAN DEN BERG

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mpshe?

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Nothing Mr Chairman, thank you.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MPSHE

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, you are excused.
WITNESS EXCUSED

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Mr Chairman, I don't know whether to use the word: "discussed" but I have discussed what I'm going to say to the Committee with my colleagues right here and I seek guidance from the Committee.  Mr Chairman, the name of Mr Mokobojane has been mentioned.  Although I do concede that it is not a direct implication but indirectly he has been implicated and I want to believe that it is a concern of the family as   well, to know the truth whether he was involved in this planning or not, flowing from the questions of Mr Molope.
	 I have within a short space of time ascertained the whereabouts of Mr Mokobojane.  My information given to me is that he is around, he is available.  I am of the intention to draft out a Section 19(4) as an implicated and to serve it on him and if possible for him to be present tomorrow.  I can only do that with the consent of the Committee.

CHAIRPERSON: I have a bit of a difficulty with him being described as an implicated person because normally an implicated person is a person who has been implicated in the commission of the act or offence in respect of which the amnesty is applied for.
	In this instance, from the testimony that has been placed before us and certainly the only information that we have, is that he was also to be an intended victim.  So, it's a bit difficult for us to say that he is an implicated person when from that point of view he is definitely not an implicated person.  From what we've heard he was a person perhaps lucky to be alive.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Yes, I hear the Chair very well and I am ad idem with the meaning of an implicated but over and above what I've said I was seeing it from the angle of the family.

CHAIRPERSON: Well perhaps he can be requested to attend, without using the 19(4) route because he's technically not an implicated person, but he can be asked to come.  Just bear with me.
	Mr Mpshe, a further aspect.  If somebody wants to call him as a witness he can be asked to do so but at the moment he is not an implicated person.  I can't say that he should therefore be summoned in terms of the Section as an implicated person when he is clearly not.  His name has been mentioned but that does not mean he is implicated as envisaged by the Act.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: Thank you Mr Chairman, I am clarified and I will then, as a person representing the family, apply that I call him as a witness to the benefit of the family.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, that would probably be the way to go Mr Mpshe.  We are certainly not trying to prevent him from being called as a witness but I think it must be done properly and I don't think it would be done properly to notify him in terms of Section 30 or whatever.

MOKOTEDI MPSHE: I stand corrected, thank you.