Special Hearings — Caprivi Hearings — 1997-08-11

MR VISSER: At this stage I give up.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mbambo, the question was, was the concern of Mrs Mbuyazi that you were being harassed by the South African Police or by the KwaZulu Police or by who?

WITNESS:  We were not being harassed by the SAP, but it was within the KwaZulu Police in Esikhaweni.  Some police, like Lieutenant Masinga, there were rumours that the police who resided in J2 were being thought of as working or collaborating with the IFP in killing the ANC.  Even though we were involved, we did not approve of that, because they were not certain of the facts, so that alone to us appeared as harassment, because we would discuss it with the IFP leadership.  Now the ... (inaudible) ... of the SAP police to search my house and we, the information that was given from Sergeant Dlamini, who was - and lied about the fact that I am an MK member, now that confirmed that there were some police in the Esikhaweni Police Station who were trying by all means to destroy us,

CHAIRPERSON: /suspecting

CHAIRPERSON: 3B suspecting us to be collaborating with the IFP.  Now the statement that Mrs Mbuyazi submitted, she submitted in her capacity as an IFP leader and a section councillor, giving it to Mdu Mzimela as the one who was in charge of us in the Esikhaweni Police Station, but that was just a strategy, that was linked by Mdu Dlamini(?) - Mzimela and Mbuyazi, so it could assist that some police in the Esikhaweni Police Station should be killed and instructions should be given for such police to be killed.  Now that was the strategy.

MR LAX: Any further questions, Mr Visser?

MR VISSER: No, I thought I did say that I had no further questions, Mr Chairman.

MR LAX: We were just hoping that that might have answered your question for you.

MR VISSER: Anything but, but thank you, Mr Chairman.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VISSER

MR LAX: Any more questions?   We'll take a short break, 15 minutes, and then we will proceed on to Victor Marion.
SHORT ADJOURNMENT
/ON RESUMPTION
4A/0 (START OF CASSETTE NO 4A)
ON RESUMPTION

MR LAX: Just before we take the evidence of this witness, we just want to clarify the time that people are going to need to make their submissions and when they might be ready by.  Some people have indicated that they could proceed with their submissions even tomorrow after Mr Dlamini has been cross-examined.  Others might want to do it on Thursday or Friday, so if we could just get an indication what would suit people and then we can plan according.

MS KRUGER: Mr Chairman, could I just have clarity with regard to one aspect?  I understand your ruling that this is sort of a preliminary investigation or fact-finding mission of this committee of the TRC.  Could you give an indication at what stage do you think you will conclude your investigation process or this fact-finding mission in terms of section 30?

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mrs Kruger.  It's difficult to say.  This is an on-going inquiry and we obviously are going to be looking at a whole range of other pieces of evidence and it's conceivable that after the submissions have been received from counsel present here that we will reserve our right to put questions to counsel for the sake of clarification.  It's also possible that certain of your clients may be subpoenaed in terms of section 29, as many of them have already.  So it's difficult to say when this process will be wound up, but I should imagine it will be within the next two months.

MS KRUGER: Mr Chairperson, that's why I have a difficulty in making a submission because, you know,
 /unless you
4A unless you have all the facts at hand and the evidence that you are evaluating, it places us in a difficult position to make submissions and, inter alia, I'm referring to I know of a particular section 29 notice that's gone out of a witness that I think might concern - his evidence might concern my client, and I am referring to a Colonel van den Berg and with regard to that I'd like a clear indication or direction of how we should then address this.  I don't want to - you've raised the question of submissions and when we are going to make the submissions, so I don't want to enter into a debate with regard to the evidence perhaps already been led, but you understand the difficulty in making a submission without having all that evidence available, seeing that that evidence of that particular individual was not led during these proceedings.

CHAIRPERSON: I understand, and obviously we would only expect you to comment in your submission on, for example, evidence that has already been led in other forums, such as the Msane trial, evidence that - or submissions that you may want to make about the witness - the evidence that has been given by witnesses today and why we should or should not believe them, and limit yourselves to that, and obviously you would have the right, when we send you or your clients, if we send your client a letter in terms of section, I think it's 30 - 30(2)(b) of the Act - if we were to send such a letter, which would advise your client that we are on the point of making an unfavourable finding against him, you would have the right at that stage to make a further submission.

MS KRUGER: That raises another concern and that's with
 /regard to a
4A regard to a reference you've just made with regard to evidence that's been led in other forums.  It makes my position very difficult because you've sent certain documentation under cover of your section 32 notice and I've obviously attended these hearings and I've heard this evidence.  Other evidence that's been led in other forums I cannot make any submissions on because it's not been made available to me, so I would then request that you make that evidence available in so far as it could implicate or affect my client, because then it seems important.  If you're going to take that into account, I think in all fairness that documentation should then be made available, which hasn't.  With regard to what has been made available and evidence that's been led, yes, fair enough, I understand you on that.

CHAIRPERSON: The only documents or the only material which is not in the public forum already, such as the Msane evidence, the so-called Malan trial evidence, is transcriptions of section 29 hearings such as the one - inquiries and we're not at liberty at this stage to make those available to you because it has to be a decision of the Commission to make that information available, but I would see absolutely no problem and in the interests of fairness I would see that the Commission would have no problem in agreeing to make that material available, in so far as it affected your clients.

MS KRUGER: Yes, well, I think, you know, it is important that that be made available because submissions can't be made and you can't rebut unless you know exactly what the allegations are.  Do you intend to request the Commission to make that available?
/
CHAIRMAN
4A

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, we do.

MS KRUGER: Is that then a ruling from yourselves?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, it is.

MS KRUGER: And then once that's been made available a submission can be made or a further submission be made.

CHAIRPERSON: It's not a ruling, it's just that it's an expression of our intention as Commissioners present here today.

MS KRUGER: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: But, other than that, we're not in possession of information which is not, as I say, within the public forum, such as the evidence collected in the boxes over there.

MS KRUGER: Thank you.

MR VISSER: Mr Chairman, Visser on record.  Just taking it up from where my learned friend has left it off, one would imagine, without being prescriptive, that the proper place to deal with any further documentary evidence would be at the time when you anticipate a hearing as provided for or as envisaged by section 30(2)(b) and at that stage one could deal with it.