Amnesty Hearings — Durban — 1999-06-23

MS LOONAT: He who did not even fire at the two victims for want of possessing a firearm was charged for murder and sentenced to 18 years imprisonment.  He has served 8 years approximately.  In line with full disclosure he has told all and is prepared to implicate all who participated in these murders and other raids and helped track them down if that is what is expected of him.
	He is extremely remorseful of what has transpired.  Innocent lives are lost in political warfare.  He apologises for the grief his participation has caused these families.  He realises that to maim or murder does not resolve anything, it in fact exacerbates the already volatile situation.  He has no previous convictions.  He was not interested in even robbing the victims on that day except if it came about that any monies taken would be used for the furtherance of his ANC party aims.

CHAIRPERSON: Is there any evidence that he was aware that any kind of repossession or robbery would be part of the instruction that was issued to him by Mr Ngcobo?

MS LOONAT: Madame Chair, I understood that as part and parcel of it, if any monies were to be recovered from their victims, it would go into a fund towards party promotion and in this case it was to buy ammunition.  Thank you.

MR MALAN: You may have understood that from him but I don't recall you having lead that evidence?

MS LOONAT: I beg to differ but I think it was led, Mr Malan, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: It wasn't specifically led, it came out from questioning of Mr Ncishane but that's not the evidence that you pointedly led, particularly with regard to the nature, the professed nature of the instructions from Mr Ngcobo, but you may proceed.

MS LOONAT: I do concede that, thank you.
	He was employed at the time of his arrest.  He did lead evidence to the effect that he sacrificed his employment in order to bring about peace to his party and family.  He honestly believed that by removing these troublemaking IFP supporters, beginning with the two deceased from whom he is presently seeking amnesty, he would surely achieve the peace he so desperately sought.
	On page 79 of the bundle I refer you to the learned Judge Combrink's statement in which he states at line 9, I quote:
"Two middle aged men, for no apparent reason except political differences were brutally murdered."
Sorry?  Page 79.  He had, I repeat, had two children and a wife.  This political warfare resulted in their deserting him.  Financially he is a man of straw so he cannot even begin to think how he could assist the bereaved families.  He appreciates his actions have caused the victims' families immense suffering.  He admits too that this is something he could not have foreseen.  Nor was it part of his agenda.  Such easy prey for political propaganda, coupled with the fact that his party persistently enjoyed losses in the hands of the IFP raiders.  He is paying the price for his political intolerance but he cannot escape the nightmares he experiences for his involvement.  He vows never to resort to criminal acts to achieve his political objectives, instead he wishes in the spirit of reconciliation to tell the truth, to reach out to all political opponents and to educate himself in party politics with the assistance of those more learned than himself.  To try to understand the other man's views instead of resorting to violence to achieve political objectives, such as peace.
	I humbly submit that my client has satisfied all the criteria as set out in the Act.  In the circumstances I humbly submit further that the Committee grant him amnesty as his actions fall within the ambit of Section 20, sub-section 2(a), (d), (f) and sub-section 3 (b) and (e).  Thank you Madame Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Is he serving an effective sentence of ...(inaudible)

MS LOONAT: That is correct, Madame Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Molohlanye?

MR MOLOHLANYE: Thank you Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you have anything to respond to these submissions made by Ms Loonat?

MR MOLOHLANYE: No your Worship, I don't have anything.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Thabethe?

MS THABETHE: No response Madame Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: In that case we bounce back to you Mr Molohlanye, do you wish to address us with regard to any legal issues concerning the application of Mr Ngcobo?

UNKNOWN: Yes Honourable Chair, thank you.
	In my submission, Chairperson, I'll not like to go back to the evidence that was led in this hearing, but I'd like to stress that the requirements of the Act, the Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act on granting of amnesty on an application, I'll submit that the applicant, Mr Ngcobo, satisfied all the requirements of Section 20 because he has made a full disclosure of his participation in the acts which were committed with a political objective and in the conflict of the past and going further to Section 20, sub-section 2(a) where this Mr Ngcobo was a member of a publicly known political party and he held a position of a commander, he disclosed that, he did not deny and he was involved in the struggle waged by such organisation of which he was a member against another publicly known organisation or liberation movement.
	I therefore submit also in terms of sub-section 3 of the same section that the acts of the applicant were associated with a political objective and therefore made the criteria in terms of sub-section 3, that is from sub-section 3(a) to (f).  Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Loonat, do you wish to respond?

MS LOONAT: No Madame Chair, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Thabethe?

MS THABETHE: No Madame Chair.

ADV DE JAGER: Could I only ask you, suppose I'm not satisfied that the money was taken for political purposes, how would it effect your main application for murder.

MR MOLOHLANYE: It would effect it in the sense that a robbery was committed, that is admitted and the money according to the applicant was used for buying ammunition for the furtherance of a political objective, that is to buy ammunition for the organisation of which he was a member.

ADV DE JAGER: No, I know that's his evidence, but suppose I won't believe him on that part of the evidence, what about the other evidence for the murder, would that still stand or would it effect that evidence?

MR MOLOHLANYE: It will effect because if you don't take it then there will be no full disclosure on the part of the applicant.

ADV DE JAGER: No full disclosure about another offence which he's not even applying for amnesty for, he's not applying for amnesty for the robbery?

MR MOLOHLANYE: But at the opening I made an application for amendment of the application to include robbery.  I think he is now in terms of why it was granted and he's applying for robbery also.

MR MALAN: Mr Molohlanye, if I may put it to you the same question in a different way?  The question is, if the panel should not be satisfied that the robbery was political but criminal, suppose that's for the moment for argument's sake, the panel decides that the robbery was a criminal act, it wasn't with a political motive, how would that effect the murder?  Would that have an effect on the motive, the political motive, the political objective sought through the murders, the killings?

MR MOLOHLANYE: Thank you Honourable Member.  I think in terms of the judgement, the applicant was not convicted on the issue of robbery and therefore his application or application for murder or for robbery if he's not taken, would not effect his evidence in terms of the murder of the main application that he made for murder.

MR MALAN: Let me put it bluntly.  Why should the deduction not be made that the killing was in order to rob?