Amnesty Hearings — Nelspruit — 1999-12-08

CHAIRPERSON: Good morning to you all.  This is a sitting of the Amnesty Committee, sitting in Nelspruit on the 8th of December 1999.  The matter that we are going to proceed with this afternoon, is the application of Mondli Wiseman Ngxongo.  Before proceeding with this matter, may I take the opportunity of introducing the panel.  I am Judge Sisi Khampepe, on my right hand side is Adv Francis Bosman, on my left-hand side, Mr Ilan Lax.  This is the panel that will be sitting here this afternoon, to hear the application of Mr Ngxongo amongst the other matters that we will be sitting to consider.  Mr Oosthuizen?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: Good morning, Madam Chair, yes, my name is Mr Oosthuizen, I am a local Attorney from Nelspruit, from the firm du Toit Smuts Attorneys, and I will be responsible for presenting the argument on behalf of Mr Ngxongo.

CHAIRPERSON: For the victims?

MR MOKOENA: Thank you Mr Chairperson, I am (indistinct) Mokoena from (indistinct), I am appearing on behalf of the victims.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Mtanga?

MS MTANGA: Thank you Chairperson, I am Lulama Mtanga, the Evidence Leader for the Commission, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Mr Oosthuizen?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: Thank you Madam Chair, if I may proceed.
	Madam Chair, as we all know, one of the purposes of the Act is to grant amnesty to persons who make full disclosure of the relevant acts associated with political objectives, the said act should have been committed in the course of conflicts of the past. 	Now, the applicant in this matter, Mr Mondli Wiseman Ngxongo did comply with the requirements of the Act, to be more specific Act 34 of 1995 as amended in the following ways, and I wish to state it in the following order:  first of all his application was submitted timeously, that is within the cut off date as stated by the Act, further on Madam Chair, the applicant gave viva voce testimony regarding his political grooming and background.  This background is IFP indoctrination, in outlook and in essence.  The applicant maintained throughout his testimony that he was  an active IFP member as well as a member of the so-called hit-squad as they were known, under the leadership of the late Mr Mbuyani and the late Mr Mbambu.  It is against this background Madam Chair, that the applicant's application should be viewed.   
	Further on the applicant testified and disclosed all the planning and the said planning was narrated step by step until the final assassination of the deceased, Mr Tiledi and others who might have been injured in this incident and specifically the cross-fire.  The applicant further made mention of the role played by his co-applicant, Mr Mbuso Romeo Mbambu.  It is also worth noting that the evidence of the applicant is on all material respects, the same.  I refer to the evidence of Mr Mbambu which is contained in pages 9 to 41 from the testimony read in conjunction with that of Mr Mbambu, Madam Chair, it is my submission that the killing of Mr Tiledi was indeed politically motivated.   The applicant further disclosed all the facts surrounding the killings of Mr Tiledi.  
	In this respect I refer to the viva voce evidence of Mr Ngxongo, which left no stone unturned.  Madam Chair, the applicant further made mention of certain persons who was part of the plan, or at least were associated with this activity.  A lot of names were mentioned and amongst those names were that of Capt Hlengwa, Mrs Mbuyasi and the aforementioned persons who were all implicated during the course of these proceedings.  The plan was to thwart the ANC from smuggling AK47s across the border, these weapons were used to kill certain members of the IFP and this has been the testimony of the applicant herein.  It is further submitted Madam Chair, that there has been a full disclosure of what has happened there.   The persons implicated were subpoenaed to appear before the TRC, if they choose to ignore the TRC, they do so at their own peril  and at their own risk.  	The applicant needless to state, was in the company of his co-applicant Mr Mbambu who was also his co-accused in the criminal trial and the co-applicant in this matter, as I have stated. 	Madam Chair, in the criminal trail, the applicant in this matter, pleaded guilty and in these proceedings, he also left no stone unturned and we are made to believe that Mr Mbambu indeed was granted amnesty.  Madam Chair, I wish to conclude and it is my submission that the acts of Mr Ngxongo was indeed an act associated with a political objective and if I can quote Section 2 of Act 34 of 1995, (2) of Section 20, Madam Chair, I quote -
"... an act associated with a political objective means any act or omission which constitutes an offence or delict which according to the criteria in (3) is associated with a political objective and which was advised, planned, directed, commanded or committed within or outside the Republic, during the period 1 March 1960 to the cut off date".
	Madam Chair, it is my submission that amnesty should be granted to the applicant, it is my submission that he came out with the truth and he asks for forgiveness and it is our humble request that amnesty be granted to my client.  Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: You have referred to Section 20(2) of the founding Act, in terms of which pertinent provisions within Section 20(2) from subsection (a) to (f) does your client seek particular reliance?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: Thank you Madam Chair.   It is in terms of Section 20(2)(a) and I wish to state what (a) says
"... any member of supporter of a publicly known political organisation or liberation movement, on behalf of or in support of such organisation or movement bona fide in furtherance of a political struggle, by such organisation or movement against the State or any former State or other publicly known political organisation or liberation movement."

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR OOSTHUIZEN: It is in other words Madam Chair, subsection (2)(a).

CHAIRPERSON: And what is your submission with regard to Section 20(3)(e)?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: (3)(e), Madam Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Section 20(3)(e)?  Is it not your contention that he was acting under the orders of Mrs Mbuyasi if I recall the evidence?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: Madam Chair, that is indeed so.  In my initial argument I indeed stated that my client acted under strict orders and it is indeed so that subsection (3)(e) states whether the act, omission or offence was committed in the execution of  an order or on behalf ...

CHAIRPERSON: You don't have to read, we are familiar with the subsection.

MR OOSTHUIZEN: It is indeed so that my client did act within or yes, within the course of a direct order that he received from senior members of the IFP.

CHAIRPERSON: What particular offences are you therefore submitting that he should be granted amnesty for?  It is the murder of Mr Tiledi, what about the attempted murder of Boy Mokoena and Mimi Matsani, Boy Mokoena and Mimi Matsani?

MR OOSTHUIZEN: Madam Chair, our request today is to grant amnesty to the applicant on all the relevant charges, as it is my submission that this act was all political motivated, it was all in fulfilment of an order that he received from the IFP senior members and it is indeed my request and submission that amnesty should also be granted on the attempted murder charges, the murder charges and all the relevant charges that is associated with this tragic incident that happened.

CHAIRPERSON: Would it be your submission therefore that though the order was for the killing of Mr Tiledi, that your client should have foreseen the possible injury or even death of the people who were inside the shop, that being Mimi Matsani and Boy Mokoena?