Amnesty Hearings — Bloemfontein — 1998-08-21

UNKNOWN: Thank you Mr Chairman.  Mr Chairman, I wouldn't bother the Committee regarding the policies of PAC and APLA, I would just go to the ...[indistinct].
	Mr Chairman, it is not in dispute that the applicants were members of APLA and that it also transpired that at the time of the operation they were commanded by the person called Prof.  Although Mr Chairman, I must confess that we did not have evidence.  I consulted with them regarding who Prof is themselves.  Unfortunately I couldn't get from them but it was through my investigation as to who was Prof in this matter.  I must confess it was difficult because I was not going to give evidence and I wouldn't adduce from them because they didn't know his real name.  But they were messing up when it comes to that, although they heard that he is from Ngcobo in Transkei.  He was Tolbut, the real surname was Tolbut and he died in that incident.  He was from Transkei at Ngcobo.
	So if one takes into account that Tolbut, if the Committee accepts that Tolbut was all the way from Ngcobo in Transkei and was here at Free State, one would wonder if he would come all the way from Transkei just only to rob at Botshabelo.  So it is clear that is was something more than that.  He was here on a specific mission and that that specific mission was to carry the struggle forward and for their survival because of the limited funds, if I can adduce from the evidence, is that if they have to operate they must have arms.  
	It is clear even in this operation, they only had one firearm which was an AK47 and grenade and knife.  So it's clear Mr Chairman, that the actions of the applicants were indeed associated with certain political objectives and that of continuing the armed struggle on behalf of their organisation the PAC.
	Mr Chairman, also that in terms of disclosure, Mr Chairman I think it's my submission that they have met the requirements of the Act and they have told the Committee actually what did take place there.  And also in the application as to what actually took place there.
	Also if I may, the first applicant here who was the 2nd accused if I'm not mistaken, in the case, Oupa Lerato Khotle did not even in court hesitate to admit that we indeed committed the crime.  Though accused number 2 at that time wanted to take his chances that he may be acquitted.
	Mr Chairman, having said that and also taking into account that the manner in which they did the operation it is clear that they only wanted money.  They manner that they did not hurt anybody there ...[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Well they gave specific information, there was specific information before the court that the policy was not to injure anyone.

MR MBANDAZAYO: Yes, Mr Chairman, definitely that was specific information that they must not injure anyone which also is a clear indication that it was not, the only purpose was to get money which they wanted to use for this political objective.  It had nothing to do, they didn't want to hurt anybody there.
	And as such Mr Chairman, I'm submitting to this Committee, without taking much time, that this Committee should grant the applicants the amnesty as they have met all the requirements which have been set down in the Act.  Thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you have anything to say?

UNKNOWN: Mr Chairman, ...[inaudible] except maybe to say, I see in the court record that the court has also found that the applicants, this criminal deed was not done for personal gain, also on page 39 ..[intervention]

CHAIRPERSON: Page 38.

MR STEENKAMP: 38, sorry Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: There was also evidence given at the trial by one Dolo, I'm not quite sure how he came to give evidence, but it was apparently accepted, that this was APLA policy.
	A further factor which I think we should consider is, not only did the Trial Court accept that it was done for a political purpose, having heard all the evidence, but the Trial Court made a finding - I'm afraid I can't, or commented on the fact that the investigating officer ...[intervention]

MR STEENKAMP: That is on page 39 at the bottom Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: ...[inaudible] that accused number 2 co-operated with them after his arrest, not only in connection with this incident but a number of other incidents and quite clearly, if there was this complete frankness, Major Hugo would have investigated the political implications and if the applicants had not been telling the truth that evidence would have been disclosed to the court and it wasn't.  So as I understand the reading of this, the prosecution excepted the fact that this was political.
	I may say one of the few cases that have come before us where the applicants had at their trial raised the political angle.  Mostly because the trials took place some time ago there was a strong denial that it was political, but in this case the issue was raised and was apparently never contested.  Do you agree with that?

MR STEENKAMP: Mr Chairman, that is correct.  I spoke to the investigating officer who is present here today and he confirms that as well.