SABC News | Sport | TV | Radio | Education | TV Licenses | Contact Us
 

Amnesty Hearings

Type AMNESTY HEARINGS

Starting Date 10 May 1999

Location VANDERBIJLPARK

Day 6

Names ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA

Case Number AM2778/96

Matter BOIPATONG MASSACRE

ON RESUMPTION

CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mr Strydom?

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: (still under oath)

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR STRYDOM: (continued) Thank you Chairperson. Mr Nosenga, you testified last week that you fired many shots, what happened to the cartridges of the bullets that were fired?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know sir.

MR STRYDOM: So these cartridges must have stayed behind on the various scenes?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR STRYDOM: The following day, that is the day after the attack, after you got up during the course of the morning, was there any trouble that you can remember or any threats or any strange thing that happened?

MR NOSENGA: Would you please repeat the question?

MR STRYDOM: On the day after the attack, during the course of the morning at the hostel, was there any threats from any one for instance people that wanted to attack the hostel or things like that, that you can remember?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't remember.

MR STRYDOM: I want to put to you that evidence was led already by the applicants that the following morning there was a threatening attack from people from Boipatong on the hostel and the hostel dwellers went out and before the parties could meet more or less in the vicinity of the robots, the Police sent the people from kwaMadala back and sent the people from Boipatong back? So you have no knowledge of that?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't know anything about that.

MR STRYDOM: On that following day, could you leave the hostel at any time if you wanted to?

MR NOSENGA: No.

MR STRYDOM: Why not?

MR NOSENGA: I was afraid of going to the township or going to town.

MR STRYDOM: Yes, but apart from being afraid, if you wanted to, could you leave the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: No. I did say earlier on that I was afraid because these people were abducting us.

MR STRYDOM: On the 19th of June 1992, that is two days after the attack, could you leave the hostel if you wanted to? Apart from being afraid, say for instance you were not afraid, could you walk out of the hostel if you wanted to?

MR NOSENGA: Would you please repeat the question leaving the hostel going to town or to the township?

CHAIRPERSON: The question is if you had wanted to leave the hostel, apart from being afraid of the people who might kidnap you, could you go out of the hostel and go anywhere?

MR NOSENGA: No, I maintained that I was not able to walk freely.

CHAIRPERSON: What were you afraid of?

MR NOSENGA: I was afraid of the people of the Vaal.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that the only reason why you couldn't leave the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is the reason.

MR STRYDOM: Did you see the Police arriving at some stage after the attack, at the hostel, that is on the days following the attack?

MR NOSENGA: No, I say I did not see them inside the hostel, I said I saw them outside the hostel, I did say that. I did say that at the beginning of my statement.

MR STRYDOM: Do you remember when you saw the Police outside the hostel for the first time?

MR NOSENGA: On the 18th, if I still remember very well, they were outside the hostel. I saw them on the 18th, outside the hostel.

MR STRYDOM: Do you remember approximately what time of the day did you see them for the first time outside the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: No, I cannot recall.

MR STRYDOM: After the Police arrived, could you still go outside the hostel if you wanted to?

MR NOSENGA: No, I would not. I have already stated that I would not be able to leave the hostel.

MR STRYDOM: Were you - let me ask you this, did you see if the Police searched the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did even though I cannot say exactly when. They came into the hostel at night, they came in to search and some people were arrested.

MR STRYDOM: On the next day, the day after the attack now, was ntelezi used again?

MR NOSENGA: Ntelezi was used on the 17th, in the evening, when we came back from Boipatong, we used it, not on the 18th.

MR STRYDOM: And according to you, on the 18th, was there any singing and dancing or anything of the kind in the hostel by the hostel dwellers?

MR NOSENGA: No, that happened on the 17th, in the evening. MR STRYDOM: Am I correct in saying that according to you, on the 18th nothing extraordinary happened, it was just an ordinary day in the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: No, except that Themba Khosa came. I am saying the one person who came on that day was Mr Themba Khosa, he came to fetch the firearm. I cannot remember anything happening that day.

MR STRYDOM: I want to put to you that there was towards the afternoon after four o'clock, there was some sort of dance and ntelezi was used and the people sang songs, do you remember that?

MR NOSENGA: I said I don't know about that, I don't know anything.

MR STRYDOM: I want to put to you that a video tape was made by the Police on the 18th, did you see that, filming the people of the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: Maybe it happened, but I saw the Police outside the premises of the hostel, I cannot dispute that, but I am saying I saw the Police outside the premises of the hostel on that day.

MR STRYDOM: I want to put to you if one looks at that video, it is clear that there was singing, some sort of dancing and ntelezi was thrown over the singing people, but you didn't see that?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't know anything about that. I only know of the meeting of the 17th, when we came back to the hostel.

MR BERGER: Chairperson, could I just intervene at this stage. We believe that there was such a video and it was an Exhibit in the criminal trial, and we have been trying to get hold of that, we were told that the Exhibits have all been lost, I don't know if my learned friend has recovered that video, and if so, we would like to see it.

MR STRYDOM: Mr Nosenga, to end off, I just want to put to you that you were not in the hostel during the attack and some time after the attack?

MR NOSENGA: No, I was at the hostel.

MR STRYDOM: Thank you Chairperson, I haven't got further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR STRYDOM

CHAIRPERSON: Who is the next person?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you Mr Chairperson, my name is Riaan du Plessis, I am standing in on behalf of Adv Hannes Botha, I will take the cross-examination of the witness, if it pleases the Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: On behalf of who?

MR DU PLESSIS: I am acting on behalf of Pedro Peens, Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR LAX: Mr Du Plessis, sorry, I didn't catch your initials?

MR DU PLESSIS: R du Plessis, Mr Lax.

MR LAX: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mr Du Plessis?

MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you Mr Chair. Mr Nosenga, when first did you meet Mr Peens?

MR NOSENGA: I did say that it was before I went to the hostel. He once arrested me for a car offence.

CHAIRPERSON: The question is when did you meet Mr Peens for the first time?

MR NOSENGA: He arrested me for the first time ...

CHAIRPERSON: Do you know when that was? When?

MR NOSENGA: I was arrested in Vereeniging.

MR LAX: What year, what month, do you remember?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot remember sir.

MR DU PLESSIS: Can you tell us what happened when Mr Peens arrested you?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying Peens arrested me and he took me to Frogadien, Frogadien I am not sure if the word is correctly pronounced, in Vanderbijlpark.

MR DU PLESSIS: This place, is it an office, can you just tell us what kind of building this would be?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know, it looks like it is a place that they used to use for assaulting and torturing people.

MR DU PLESSIS: Were you assaulted during interrogation by Mr Peens?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct, he assaulted me.

MR DU PLESSIS: What did he do to you?

MR NOSENGA: He applied electric shocks on me and he covered my face with a tube and he administered some things on my fingers, I don't know what they are.

MR DU PLESSIS: If you say he administered electric shocks on you, can you just give us an explanation how did he do this?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying he put some wires on my fingers and I cannot explain how it worked, but it used to affect me.

MR DU PLESSIS: Were you blindfolded when this incident occurred?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, because the tube had covered my eyes as well as my nose.

MR DU PLESSIS: How do you know that he administered wires on your fingers? Did you see the wires?

MR NOSENGA: I saw these wires before he actually covered my face.

MR DU PLESSIS: And when were you released after this incident?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot remember, but yes, I was released ultimately, but I cannot recall when.

MR DU PLESSIS: Was it on the same day of your arrest, two days later, a month? Can you give us any idea?

MR NOSENGA: Sir, I am saying I cannot recall because I was taken to the Police station where I was locked in.

CHAIRPERSON: Can you remember whether you were released on the same day or the following day, can you remember that as well?

MR NOSENGA: I think I spent a week if not two, I am not quite sure.

MR DU PLESSIS: Did you ever appear in a court of law during that two weeks?

MR NOSENGA: No, I cannot recall. No, I did not appear before the Court. They just assaulted me and kept me for two weeks at Vanderbijlpark.

MR DU PLESSIS: And where were you released?

MR NOSENGA: In Vanderbijlpark.

MR DU PLESSIS: At the Police station?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR DU PLESSIS: Before the meeting two weeks before the Boipatong massacre, did you see Mr Peens again?

MR NOSENGA: I saw Peens on the 17th and during the week, the two weeks prior to the attack, meeting.

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Nosenga, I have asked you before the meeting that took place two weeks before the Boipatong massacre, did you see Mr Peens again?

MR NOSENGA: I saw him on the 17th, during the day, he was actually giving Gatiza some money and I also saw him at Boipatong in the evening.

MR DU PLESSIS: So after the first arrest and the meeting, you never saw him again?

MR NOSENGA: Would you please repeat the question?

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Nosenga, after your first arrest by Mr Peens, and before the meeting that took place two weeks before the Boipatong massacre, you never saw Mr Peens again, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR DU PLESSIS: At this meeting, two weeks before Boipatong, are you sure that Mr Peens was present at this meeting?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I am sure. I am certain I saw him at that meeting two weeks prior to the attack, that is the meeting of the 14th.

MR DU PLESSIS: How do you know this, that it was Mr Peens?

MR NOSENGA: I did say that I was not seeing him for the first time, you will remember you asked me when I met him for the first time, I told you how he arrested me. I was not seeing him for the first time at the hostel. It was the same Peens who was working for the Murder and Robbery Unit, he is the one who attended the meeting two weeks prior to the attack in the company of Themba Khosa.

MR DU PLESSIS: Why do you say the person who arrested you was the same person who was at the meeting two weeks before Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: I know Peens, it was Peens, he is the one who arrested me. He was also present at the hostel two weeks prior to the attack. He attended that meeting, so I knew him.

MR DU PLESSIS: At this meeting, did Mr Peens at any stage address the people present at the meeting?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot recall sir. I cannot recall whether he addressed the crowd.

MR DU PLESSIS: Can you remember what he did at the meeting?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot remember him doing anything in particular, except that he was standing there with Themba Khosa.

MR DU PLESSIS: Do you know the purpose why Mr Peens would allegedly be at this meeting if he said nothing and he did nothing at the meeting?

MR NOSENGA: No.

MR DU PLESSIS: Can you remember who Chaired this meeting?

MR NOSENGA: I did say that it was Gatchene as well as other induna's.

MR DU PLESSIS: In your statement, Mr Chairman, Exhibit R on page 19, paragraph 5, the second sentence starting with "Themba Khosa", and I will read it out to you

"... Themba Khosa and Mr Peens, a member of the Murder and Robbery Squad in Flora Gardens, Chaired the meeting."

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't know anything about that, I only said that Themba Khosa as well as Peens were present at the meeting.

MR DU PLESSIS: So this is not correct, Mr Peens did not, and Mr Khosa did not ...

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is not correct. I am simply saying they were present at the meeting, but the person who spoke was Gatchene.

MR DU PLESSIS: Do you remember if a person by the name of Danie was present?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't remember Danie, I only remember Peens. I only saw Danie for the first time during the attack on the 17th, in the evening.

MR DU PLESSIS: Who is this person by the name of Danie?

MR NOSENGA: Danie is one of the Police working for the Murder and Robbery Unit. I just know him to be Danie.

MR DU PLESSIS: How do you know his name?

MR NOSENGA: I used to hear people when they were talking, calling him Danie.

MR DU PLESSIS: Now, I refer you to paragraph 7 on page 19, the second sentence and I will read it out to you

"... Peens and Danie also said that they would supply Rooikop with weapons and he should give them to Themba Khosa, who would bring them to the hostel ..."

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't know anything about that.

MR DU PLESSIS: Sir, can you remember who took down this statement from you?

MR NOSENGA: No, I cannot recall. I did indicate that several people came to take statements from me.

MR DU PLESSIS: If I put it to you that Mr Kjellberg took this statement from you, what would you say about that?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot dispute that.

MR DU PLESSIS: Do you know Mr Kjellberg?

MR NOSENGA: No, I am hearing the name for the first time.

MR DU PLESSIS: Have you ever consulted with Mr Kjellberg?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I cannot recall, there were many of these people who came to me.

MR DU PLESSIS: Do you know a person by the name of Jan?

MR NOSENGA: No.

MR DU PLESSIS: This statement was supposed to be taken by Mr Jan Ike Kjellberg, do you know if there is any reason why he would put down all of this information, which he didn't get from you?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying the person who was interpreting for me, was not doing a good job, and I had difficulty communicating.

CHAIRPERSON: What language was this person speaking who was interpreting for you?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying he was speaking Zulu, but he was not fluent, because he was a Sotho speaking person.

CHAIRPERSON: Did the Interpreter - wait, just listen to the question before you answer it - the person who interpreted for you, what language did he speak to you?

MR NOSENGA: He was communicating to me in Zulu, but his Zulu was not fluent, he was not fluent in the language.

CHAIRPERSON: Where does the Sotho come in then?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying he said to me he is a Sotho speaking person, he was going to try as much as he could to speak Zulu.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you request for a Zulu speaking Interpreter?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did. I told them that I am not Sotho speaking.

CHAIRPERSON: And you say that you corrected this person on a number of occasions?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct. I was telling him often times to rectify mistakes in the statements and he would say he his sorry.

CHAIRPERSON: Were you correcting his interpretation of what you had said to him?

MR NOSENGA: Yes. Yes, I would hear him saying something different.

CHAIRPERSON: This is what he was telling the person who was taking down the statement?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR LAX: If I may Chairperson, you say you would hear him saying something different, what language was he saying something different in?

MR NOSENGA: He was speaking this broken Zulu.

MR LAX: No you were speaking Zulu to him, he was speaking broken Zulu to you, you said to us you would hear him saying something different, he must have then been translating what you had said, to the person taking the statement, isn't that so? Yes or no, plain and simple?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, yes sir, I cannot dispute that.

MR LAX: So the question is then, what language was he talking to this other person in?

MR NOSENGA: He was speaking this English, I don't know and he would come back to me and he would speak in Zulu.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you know the difference between English and Afrikaans?

MR NOSENGA: They were speaking English. He was speaking English.

MR LAX: I thought you told us earlier that you don't understand English?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, yes, but they were speaking English.

MR LAX: Well, then how did you know that he wasn't telling that person what you had told him?

MR NOSENGA: The legal counsel used to look at the statement at the end of taking it, and verify it with me through the Interpreter.

CHAIRPERSON: Is the position that the statement was read back to you?

MR NOSENGA: He would ask me each time he was writing, whether it was correct, whether the statement was correct or what he was writing, is correct, and I would rectify him or rectify the statement along the way when the need arose.

CHAIRPERSON: Is the position that after you had spoken, this was interpreted to the person who was taking down the statement?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: And then you would be asked by the person who is taking down the statement, who would read back what he has just written down, to confirm whether in fact this is what you had said?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I would give him the information and it would be interpreted, written down and verified.

CHAIRPERSON: And this happened from the beginning to the end of the statement?

INTERPRETER: May the question please be repeated? May the question please be repeated?

MR LAX: Chairperson, they are asking you to repeat the question, the Translators, sorry.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh, what was the question, I can't even recall. MR LAX: They were talking about repeating the question.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, you have been telling us that the person who was taking down the statement, after you had spoken, this person would confirm with you by asking you whether in fact that is what you had said?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: That happened throughout the statement?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: And as you were going along, was the statement being corrected?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: What I want to find out is whenever you made corrections, were these recorded down?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I would see the person scratching out what he had written before.

CHAIRPERSON: So he would scratch what is down, and write something else?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: And would he confirm whether that is in fact what you had said?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: And what would you say, would you confirm that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, because he would scratch out some things, I would see him scratching out some things.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, now when you told us that you corrected the Interpreter on a number of occasions, correcting his interpretation, is that what you were referring to?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, because the Attorney asked me if the statement was as I told the Interpreter.

MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you Mr Chair. Mr Nosenga, can I assume then that you reject the statement that Mr Peens addressed the meeting on that day?

CHAIRPERSON: Has he not told us that that is not correct, hasn't he told us that?

MR DU PLESSIS: Excuse me Mr Chair. In your evidence in chief, according to my notes, Mr Nosenga, you said the following, I don't know if you can remember

"... Peens said he will supply weapons, Gatchene was interpreting ..."

Can you remember that you testified to this extent?

MR NOSENGA: No, I said the person who addressed the meeting was Gatchene.

MR DU PLESSIS: So this is not correct?

MR NOSENGA: No, it is not correct.

MR DU PLESSIS: Can you remember if a person by the name of Chaka was present at this meeting?

MR NOSENGA: No sir, I did indicate that he was not present.

MR DU PLESSIS: Once again sir, in my notes, in your evidence in chief, you testified that Chaka accompanied Peens to the meeting?

MR NOSENGA: No, I said he was not present.

MR DU PLESSIS: Do you wish to change your testimony now?

MR NOSENGA: I said Chaka was not present, I only met him on the 17th.

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Nosenga, let's move on to the day of the massacre. You said you saw Mr Peens again on that day, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: I did not say that I saw Mr Peens on the 18th.

MR DU PLESSIS: Sir on the day of the massacre, the day but before the massacre took place, did you see Mr Peens again?

MR NOSENGA: I saw him during the day on the 17th at the Iscor parking lot.

MR DU PLESSIS: Was he alone?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I saw him, just him.

MR DU PLESSIS: So nobody accompanied him, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I only saw Peens handing money over to Gatiza.

MR DU PLESSIS: How do you know that Mr Peens handed money over to Mr Keswa? Did you see this money?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did see the money.

MR DU PLESSIS: How much money was it?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know.

MR DU PLESSIS: How did you see that it was money, sir?

MR NOSENGA: I was close to them when he handed the money over.

MR DU PLESSIS: How close sir?

MR NOSENGA: I was close, from where I am sitting it would be myself and Victor and Mr Peens. The applicant pointed to his legal representative and Mr Strydom.

MR DU PLESSIS: So you could hear, if there was any conversation between Mr Peens and Mr Keswa, you would be able to hear it, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: No, I did not hear them.

MR DU PLESSIS: Was there no conversation between them, or you didn't hear them having a conversation?

MR NOSENGA: They did have a conversation, but I didn't hear what they were saying.

ADV SIGODI: Sorry, why couldn't you hear what they were saying?

MR NOSENGA: They were speaking in English therefore I did not hear what they were saying.

ADV SIGODI: You did not understand what they were saying?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did not understand them. Yes, I did not understand what they were saying.

ADV SIGODI: Were you part of this what shall I call it, the group or was it you, Gatiza and Peens together when Peens was giving Gatiza the money because as you described it, you were quite close together, was it the three of you together?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, there were three of us at the parking lot.

ADV SIGODI: Where did Peens, did Gatiza know that he was going to meet Peens?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know whether he knew.

ADV SIGODI: Did you go together with Gatiza to Peens?

MR NOSENGA: I was with Gatiza at the parking lot, we were just outside the hostel at the Iscor parking lot. That is where Peens came to.

MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you Mr Chair. This meeting between Mr Peens and Mr Keswa, would you describe it as a private, secretive meeting?

MR NOSENGA: I would not know. I do not know whether it was private or not.

MR DU PLESSIS: Sir, if you were there, you would have known how the parties would act, would they act as if there was a secret between themselves, or didn't they care who saw them meeting with each other?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know sir, I have already stated that they met outside the hostel at the Iscor parking lot. I do not know whether it was private, secretive or not.

MR DU PLESSIS: Why did you join the meeting sir?

MR NOSENGA: I was in the company of Gatiza.

MR DU PLESSIS: Did he invite you to the meeting?

MR NOSENGA: He just told me that we should go to the parking lot.

MR DU PLESSIS: Did he tell you why you were going to go to the parking lot?

MR NOSENGA: No, he did not tell me. I just went along because it was my friend.

MR DU PLESSIS: And now when you met Mr Peens, the Police Official, did you recognise him as the Official who assaulted you previously?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did recognise him, he was the same Peens who had arrested me, whilst I was still staying at the township.

MR DU PLESSIS: And you stayed with that meeting, you didn't go away?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I remained there until Peens left.

CHAIRPERSON: When Peens first arrested you, were you still staying in Sebokeng?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is what I said. He arrested me in connection with a vehicle.

CHAIRPERSON: And that is when you were detained for approximately two weeks from what you ...

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, and the next time you saw him, was at the hostel?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, during the day and in the evening of the 17th.

MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Nosenga, this money, was it handed over in a purse, in a bag or just from one hand to another, can you remember?

MR NOSENGA: Peens removed it from his pocket and handed it over to Gatiza, but I do not know how much it was.

MR DU PLESSIS: Can you remember if you saw the denominations of the money, was it ...

MR NOSENGA: No, I do not know how much it was, I just saw that it was cash.

MR DU PLESSIS: Did you see if it was R50 bills, R100 bills, R20 bills, anything, can you remember anything about the money?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did see a R50 note.

MR DU PLESSIS: Only one?

MR NOSENGA: It was rolled up in a bundle, so I don't know how much it was, or how many R50 notes there were.

MR DU PLESSIS: So then there were more than one R50 note, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I don't know, I am not in a position to know, because it was rolled up so I cannot say whether there was just one R50 note or more than one. He just handed the money over in that fashion.

MR DU PLESSIS: It is still your submission or evidence that at the meeting present was yourself, Mr Peens and Mr Keswa, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR DU PLESSIS: Nobody else?

MR NOSENGA: No, I did not see anybody else.

MR DU PLESSIS: Sir, then I refer you to page 20 of your statement, paragraph 10 the first sentence and I will read it out to you.

"... I also saw Peens coming to the hostel on the day of the attack together with his colleague Chaka ..."

Now what is your evidence, was Chaka with Mr Peens or was he not with Mr Peens?

MR NOSENGA: I stated before that I only saw Chaka on the evening of the 17th.

MR DU PLESSIS: So you reject this sentence which I have read to you?

MR NOSENGA: You questioned me on who was present at the parking lot and I told you the people who were present.

MR DU PLESSIS: Sir, except for yourself, Mr Peens when he assaulted you the first time, or when he assaulted you, you saw him at a meeting and then you saw him this time, were these the only times that you saw Mr Peens before the night of the attack at Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR DU PLESSIS: Then sir, I refer you to paragraph 10 again, the last sentence in which you said

"... I often saw Peens meeting Victor Keswa and I am sure that he got money from Peens."

Do you reject the statement?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I do. Victor Keswa received money from Peens on the 17th, that is at the parking lot but I do not know about the fact that he often used to receive money from him.

MR DU PLESSIS: Sir, if I put it to you that Mr Keswa was in custody on that day, what would you say about that?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know anything about that. As I said before, I last saw Victor Keswa on that day, I do not know what happened to him.

CHAIRPERSON: On what day is that?

MR DU PLESSIS: On the day of the meeting, the same day as ...

CHAIRPERSON: The 17th?

MR DU PLESSIS: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes?

MR DU PLESSIS: Sir, then I put it to you that it is my instructions that there never was a meeting on the 17th between Mr Peens, yourself and Mr Keswa, you are welcome to answer if you want to.

CHAIRPERSON: Just before he answers that, are you putting it to this witness that on the 17th of June, Mr Peens was in custody? Mr Keswa, I beg your pardon?

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Keswa, that is correct yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh, okay, all right.

MR NOSENGA: I do not know anything about that. I will just not implicate Keswa and Peens falsely. I did see him on the 17th.

MR DU PLESSIS: How late in the day did this meeting take place?

CHAIRPERSON: Which meeting now?

MR DU PLESSIS: The meeting which you allege took place between yourself, Mr Keswa and Mr Peens, at what time of the day did it take place?

MR NOSENGA: It was during the day, I cannot say exactly what time it was.

CHAIRPERSON: We have canvassed this point, this meeting, he has denied it and you put it to him that such a meeting didn't take place, what else is there to cover now?

MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you Mr Chairperson, I will move on. When did you see Mr Peens next after the meeting?

MR NOSENGA: Which meeting are you referring to?

MR DU PLESSIS: The meeting between yourself, Mr Peens and Mr Keswa?

MR NOSENGA: I saw him in the evening of the 17th when we went to attack Boipatong.

MR DU PLESSIS: How late did you see Mr Peens?

MR NOSENGA: Please repeat that question.

MR DU PLESSIS: How late did you see him?

MR NOSENGA: It was in the evening, I don't know what the time was.

MR DU PLESSIS: How many hours after the alleged meeting between yourself and Mr Keswa and Peens?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot recall. I saw him at the parking lot and thereafter I only saw him in the evening when we went to Boipatong.

MR DU PLESSIS: Where did you see Mr Peens in the evening?

MR NOSENGA: At the veld in Boipatong, that is near the bridge, that is on your way to Boipatong.

MR DU PLESSIS: Where did you find him in the veld?

MR NOSENGA: There is a main road towards Sebokeng and there is a veld nearby there, that is just before you come to Boipatong.

MR DU PLESSIS: Was he alone?

MR NOSENGA: I said he was in the company of other Police Officers, he was not alone.

MR DU PLESSIS: How many other Officers did you see?

MR NOSENGA: I saw four casspirs, but I cannot be certain of the number of the Police Officers. I only knew the people who were in my casspir.

MR DU PLESSIS: Was Mr Peens in or outside one of the casspirs when you saw him, when you met him?

MR NOSENGA: He was standing outside the casspir. The casspirs were stationary and they were standing outside. I could see because there were lights in the vicinity.

MR DU PLESSIS: Was he the only Official, Police Official standing outside the casspir or were there people joining him?

MR NOSENGA: I saw Peens and others like Rooikop.

MR DU PLESSIS: Anybody else?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, there were, but I do not know their names.

MR DU PLESSIS: Did you see a person by the name of Chaka?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did see him.

MR DU PLESSIS: So now you remember that Chaka was present?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, he was present when people were attacked and killed in Boipatong.

MR DU PLESSIS: When you arrived in the veld in the casspirs, did Mr Peens say anything to you?

MR NOSENGA: I do not recall.

MR DU PLESSIS: Why did you, what happened then when you met and everybody got together, what happened then, what happened next?

MR NOSENGA: As I stated before, Gatchene said we should get onto the casspirs and I climbed onto the one that was driven by somebody else in which Peens was also a passenger. Other people walked on foot.

MR DU PLESSIS: Did you get into the casspir before Mr Peens or after him?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot recall sir, but we were in the same casspir.

MR DU PLESSIS: Can you describe to us, for how long were you in the casspir?

MR NOSENGA: Please repeat that.

MR DU PLESSIS: Was this the first time you had been in a casspir?

MR NOSENGA: I was with other residents of kwaMadala hostel, it was not just me who went into the casspir.

MR LAX: The question was and just listen to the questions please, was this the first time you were in a casspir, yes or no? Was this the first time you had been in a casspir, yes or no, just answer the question.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, it was the first time.

MR LAX: Carry on.

MR NOSENGA: It was not the first time, I first rode in a casspir when I was being investigated for some other crimes, and then I rode in a casspir again when we went to Boipatong.

MR LAX: You have given two totally different answers here, your first answer was yes, this is the first time you had been in a casspir, now you are saying no, this is not the first time you had been in a casspir, you were in a casspir before when you were being investigated for some other crimes. Please explain.

MR NOSENGA: I first rode in a casspir when I was investigated for those other offences and then the second time I went into a casspir, was when I rode to Boipatong.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Du Plessis we know that he had been in a casspir before, let's move on.

MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you Mr Chairperson. Mr Nosenga, for how far were you in the casspir, can you remember how far the casspir drove before you got out?

MR NOSENGA: As we entered the township, we got off on the first street and took cover and other casspirs went into other streets. We took cover on the first street and went into the first house.

MR DU PLESSIS: Can you give me an estimate if it was 100 metres, one kilometre, how far did you drive in the casspir?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, can you recall how far had you been in the casspir before you got out of the casspir? If you can remember say so, if you can't, tell us.

MR NOSENGA: No, I cannot recall.

MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you Mr Chair. Was there any specific reason why you had to board the casspir, did anybody tell you why you had to board the casspir?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Du Plessis, the evidence from this witness as I recall it, is to the effect that it is Gatchene who issued instructions that they should get into the casspirs.

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Chairperson, I would just like to know if there was any reason why they had to get into the casspir.

CHAIRPERSON: We know from this witness that Gatchene was in charge of the group, they listened to him, he said they must get into the casspir.

MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you Mr Chair. Mr Nosenga, when you got off the casspir, did you see Mr Peens, what he did then?

MR NOSENGA: Mr Peens did not go into the houses. What they did was to shoot at people in the street, we are the only people who went into the houses.

MR DU PLESSIS: Did you keep constant eye contact with Mr Peens whilst you were on the ground?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, he did not get into people's premises or into the houses. He was just, he just remained on the street.

MR DU PLESSIS: Do you know if he wore any protective clothing?

MR NOSENGA: No, I just saw him in his private clothes.

MR DU PLESSIS: Can you remember if he was camouflaged or if his face was camouflaged?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, they wee camouflaged. They had painted some substance on their faces and they were wearing balaclavas as well.

MR DU PLESSIS: Then sir, how did you know that it was Mr Peens that was on the ground, from the casspir? Could you distinguish between the Police Officers?

MR NOSENGA: I did see him.

MR DU PLESSIS: How did you know it was Mr Peens, was there any distinguishable marks that you can know it was Mr Peens?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I could see him.

MR DU PLESSIS: Please explain how you could distinguish Mr Peens from the other Police Officials.

MR NOSENGA: He was wearing a white shirt.

MR DU PLESSIS: What else?

MR NOSENGA: I saw him wearing a white shirt and a pair of jeans.

MR DU PLESSIS: Was he the only person wearing a white shirt and jeans?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, other people were wearing pants, slacks and some were wearing jackets.

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Nosenga, I refer you to page 21 of your statement, paragraph 20 and I will read it out to you

"... Peens also shot people, he shot from the casspir. I do not know what kind of weapon he used, but I do not think he used his Police firearm."

MR NOSENGA: That is correct, the casspir was driving very slowly and he was able to get of the casspir and shoot at people in the street.

CHAIRPERSON: The casspir was moving slowly?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, it was moving slowly.

CHAIRPERSON: So Peens would alight from the casspir, shoot at people, go back to the casspir?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is what I am saying. After we had left the casspir, they remained in the casspir, but they would get off and shoot at people in the street.

CHAIRPERSON: What Mr Du Plessis wants to clarify from you is the statement that Peens shot from the casspir. Do you understand what that means?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that statement correct?

MR NOSENGA: No, it is not true. The truth is that he would get off the casspir and shoot at people in the street.

MR DU PLESSIS: Did you see if Chaka was around?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did see him.

MR DU PLESSIS: What did he do?

MR NOSENGA: He was also shooting at people.

MR DU PLESSIS: Did he also get off the casspir or was he on the casspir when he fired shots?

MR NOSENGA: The Police would get off the casspir, I did not see them shooting from the casspir.

MR DU PLESSIS: Did you see Mr Chaka get off the casspir?

MR NOSENGA: I stated before that Chaka also fired at people, you questioned me on Peens and I explained that he would get off the casspir, shoot at people and then climb on the casspir again.

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Nosenga, did you see what kind of firearm Mr Peens used?

MR NOSENGA: No, it was a small gun, but I do not know what type if was.

MR DU PLESSIS: Was it a handgun or was it a pistol or - excuse me, a firearm, a rifle, anything an AK47, an R1, anything can you give a description, or didn't you see?

MR NOSENGA: I said it was a small gun, I do not know what type it was.

MR DU PLESSIS: Mr Nosenga, it is my instructions and I will put it to you that Mr Peens was never at a meeting two weeks before the Boipatong massacre.

MR NOSENGA: Sir, I say he was present. I would not implicate Mr Peens falsely.

MR DU PLESSIS: It is also our instructions that there was no meeting between Mr Peens and Mr Keswa on the day of the Boipatong massacre.

MR NOSENGA: Sir, I said I was present at that meeting of the 17th, that is during the day.

MR DU PLESSIS: As a matter of fact, no such meeting did take place on that day?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know about that.

MR DU PLESSIS: And thirdly and lastly, Mr Peens was not involved in any way with the Boipatong massacre?

MR NOSENGA: He did play a role, he was involved in the shooting of people in Boipatong.

MR DU PLESSIS: Thank you Mr Chair, I have no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR DU PLESSIS

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Is there anyone, who is the next?

MR DA SILVA: I have no questions, Mr Chairman.

NO CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR DA SILVA

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Berger?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR BERGER: Thank you Chairperson. Mr Nosenga, I am sure you are tired and you want to get out of the witness box, but I am going to ask you please to listen carefully to my questions and to concentrate on them.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I understand.

MR BERGER: Do you remember when you were at Leeukop prison, there was a Prisoners' Organisation there that looked after the interests of prisoners?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot recall.

MR BERGER: If I give you the name of a person, Mr Efrahim Nkosi, does that ring a bell?

MR NOSENGA: No. No, I cannot remember very well.

MR BERGER: I am talking about the time at the beginning of 1996, approximately January 1996, you were at Leeukop at that time, am I right?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: There was this organisation, as I say, and this Mr Nkosi was a member of that organisation, a representative of that organisation in prison with you at Leeukop? Sorry, you said something?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I hear that.

MR BERGER: And you approached Mr Nkosi for some assistance with your position, is that right?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, it is possible, I cannot deny that, it is possible I went to him for help.

MR BERGER: You see, because this Mr Nkosi telephoned Mongezi, that is Mongezi Tshongweni and he told Mongezi that there was a man at Leeukop by the name of Mr Nosenga who needed assistance. Now Mongezi was at that time, the Head of the ANC's Truth and Reconciliation Desk.

MR NOSENGA: It is possible but I do not know him.

MR BERGER: Mr Nosenga, let me just explain to you how it worked at the ANC very briefly, there was a TRC desk, in other words there was an office in the ANC that was set up to assist people who wanted to apply for amnesty and at that time, it was to assist ANC members who wanted to apply for amnesty. Mongezi was the Head of that department, do you understand?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I understand.

MR BERGER: Then after Mr Nkosi had spoken to Mongezi and Mongezi said yes, he would talk to you, then you called Mongezi, do you remember that?

CHAIRPERSON: What is the question? I beg your pardon?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying it is possible I called him.

ADV SIGODI: You say it is possible, but do you remember it? Do you remember calling Mongezi?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying yes, it is possible, but I cannot remember when.

MR BERGER: Let me try and help you Mr Nosenga. There was a telephone in prison that you could use, am I right?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: And you needed a phone card to use that, am I right?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR BERGER: And you didn't have to have too much money on your phone card, am I right?

MR NOSENGA: Correct.

MR BERGER: And so you phoned Mongezi at the ANC, asked him to assist you, but you couldn't speak very long and he said he would get back you to after he took your prison number, isn't that right?

MR NOSENGA: Correct.

MR BERGER: And then ...

CHAIRPERSON: Do you now remember that you telephoned Mr Mongezi?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I remember now that he is explaining me and refreshing my memory.

MR BERGER: And you asked Mongezi to come and see you at Leeukop prison because you wanted his assistance, am I right?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: And indeed, Mongezi came to see you at Leeukop prison am I right?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR BERGER: And you told Mongezi when he saw you at Leeukop, about the fact that you had been convicted for killing people in Sebokeng?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR BERGER: And you also told him when he visited you then, that you had participated in the Boipatong massacre, am I right?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR BERGER: You also told him that you had been forced to confess to the Sebokeng killings?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR BERGER: And we are talking now about January 1996, in that period?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is possible.

MR BERGER: And then what you also told Mongezi was that you wanted to apply for amnesty for Sebokeng and for Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR BERGER: And also you will remember that you said to Mongezi that you wanted to appeal against your conviction for Sebokeng? Do you remember that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR BERGER: But at that time, Mongezi said to you he needed to find out from the ANC if they could assist you because you were not a member of the ANC, you were a member of the IFP?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR BERGER: And he promised that he would come back to you with a decision.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: Then a little while after that, Mongezi came back to you at Leeukop prison, in other words he came to visit you again?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I think he came, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Speak up so that we can hear.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I am saying it is possible he came.

MR BERGER: Well, let me try and refresh your memory if I can. When Mongezi left you after the first visit, he was going to find out whether the ANC would be prepared to assist you in your application for amnesty for Boipatong and Sebokeng?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: And he was going to find out whether the ANC would assist you in appealing against your conviction for Sebokeng?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: I am sorry Mr Nosenga, then after Mongezi left, you phoned him again to find out what was happening and whether the ANC was going to assist you, do you remember that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, it is possible I called him.

MR BERGER: And he said that the ANC would assist you, he would assist you and he would come back to see you.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: Now, when Mongezi came back to see you, he was accompanied by a woman, a white woman, do you remember that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is possible. I am saying yes, it is possible he was in the company of a white lady even though I cannot recall the name.

MR BERGER: Her name is Caroline Nichols, she came to see you with Mongezi?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is possible sir.

MR BERGER: And you told Mongezi and Caroline about your involvement in the Boipatong massacre?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR STRYDOM: Chairperson, I want to object at this stage, my learned friend is putting the one leading question after the other. Normally that is the right of a person that cross-examines, I will concede that, but if the cross-examiner shares an interest with the witness, so what he wants to hear is Police complicity, and under those circumstances, he cannot put leading questions. I haven't got authority with me, but I am aware of certain authorities that state exactly that. I will go a little bit further by stating that it has been placed on record that my learned friend, consulted with this witness, and under those circumstances, I will also say that he won't be entitled to put leading questions to him.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mr Berger.

MR BERGER: Chairperson, do you want me to argue? Chairperson, I don't share an identity of interests with this witness. I represent certain victims of the massacre, this witness has been cross-examined on a statement that he made to Mongezi, statements which are before the Commission and I am attempting to ask the witness whose memory has been shown to be faulty, whether he agrees with certain evidence. If he agrees with it, then there is no need to lead that evidence. If I need to refresh his memory as is obviously the case, I submit I am entitled to do so. I am not badgering the witness in any way, I am simply asking him in a very calm and ...

CHAIRPERSON: The objection is that you cannot just read to him everything and get him just to say yes, yes, to everything. I think that is the basis. What do you say to that? Because you might as well just hand him the statement and ask him to confirm that.

MR BERGER: If there is something that he disagrees with, then he will say so. My learned friends, when they cross-examine the applicants for example, when Adv Pretorius cross-examined some of the applicants led by Adv Strydom, put leading questions to the witness, isn't that so, and there was no problem with that?

CHAIRPERSON: You just have to respond to what has been said to you. Very well, no objection was taken to the others, here there is an objection.

MS TANZER: Chairperson, isn't it my place as the legal representative to object, whether the leading question is not being placed fairly to the applicant or not? I haven't raised such an objection and I don't think, as the legal representative, I submit the question should be continued.

CHAIRPERSON: What is your response Mr Strydom to what Mr Berger has said?

MR STRYDOM: Chairperson my response is that Mr Berger, or the people he represent, does share to some extent identity of interest and the basis of my objection is that if there is an identity of interest, then a cross-examiner cannot just put leading questions. That is the first leg and the second leg, although he didn't get to that stage and I would probably object at a later stage if that is going to happen, if he is going to put certain things that happened during a consultation he had with this witness, but at this stage the objection is that, what I put is that there is in fact an identity of interest in that the family wants to show, to prove that the Police were involved, and this witness is saying exactly that in his evidence, and therefore I would say leading questions would not be allowed. Chairperson, can I just add something ...

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Strydom, we are mindful of the fact that the witness is being led, we are mindful of his answers to these leading questions, it seems to me that that is a matter that should affect the weight to be attached to that kind of evidence.

MR STRYDOM: Yes Chairperson, if I can just add one thing and that is that if certain allegations can be put now, what happened during consultation when Caroline Nichols was present, this objection will be the same because Caroline Nichols is a partner of the firm that represents the witness.

CHAIRPERSON: We are mindful of the background to this case. We are aware of that.

MR STRYDOM: Thank you Chairperson.

MR BERGER: Chairperson, could we take the adjournment now?

CHAIRPERSON: Have you finished covering this point?

MR BERGER: No, I haven't finished.

CHAIRPERSON: Well, just finish this point first before we adjourn.

MR BERGER: Chairperson, it relates to the objection taken by Mr Strydom, could we please have an adjournment at this stage?

CHAIRPERSON: What is the purpose of the objection Mr Berger?

MR BERGER: The purpose of the objection?

CHAIRPERSON: The purpose of an adjournment, because I am giving you the opportunity now to round up the point that you have just canvassed so that by the time that we take the adjournment, you can move on to another point. Unless you are telling me you don't know whether to continue with the cross-examination or not?

MR BERGER: Chairperson, I just want to consider a position at this stage.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, we will take the adjournment and come back at half past eleven.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, it has occurred to me that Mr Mey who appears for Mr Chaka and the Police Officer known as Rooikop, was not given the opportunity to cross-examine the applicant. What we propose doing is to allow him the opportunity to do so once the victims' representatives have finished their cross-examination. You may continue Mr Berger.

MR BERGER: Thank you Chairperson. Chairperson, we have considered our position during the break and we considered our position over the weekend as well, and we have also taken advice from certain senior Counsel as well, the allegations made by our learned friends for the applicants against us as legal representatives, are very serious although at this stage ... (tape ends) ... and it places us in a very difficult position. It means Chairperson in our view, that we have to put a version to Mr Nosenga, our version on what happened, he can either agree with it, he can deny it, but either we must put the version Chairperson, or else we must get legal representatives for ourselves to put that version. Our learned friends have not once come to ask us what is our version, what do we say about these allegations.

CHAIRPERSON: This statement you are making, what am I supposed to make with the statement that you are making?

MR BERGER: It is in response to the objection from ...

CHAIRPERSON: I have ruled on that objection, but that the question is allowed, and that you will continue.

MR BERGER: Chairperson, also in your ruling you said that it will affect the weight of the evidence at the end.

CHAIRPERSON: Everyone knows that leading questions, if you put leading questions, whether in chief or anywhere, it is a matter which affects the weight to be attached to that evidence. That is how one assesses the evidence.

MR BERGER: Yes Chairperson, but I tried to outline the particular peculiar circumstances in which we find ourselves.

CHAIRPERSON: I understand that Mr Berger, and I have ruled that you can continue cross-examining this witness.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR BERGER: (continued) As you please Chairperson. Mr Nosenga, I want you to try and think back, I know it is difficult, to the time when you were in Leeukop at the beginning of 1996. Do you remember how many times Mongezi came to see you?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot remember very well. Yes, he did come.

CHAIRPERSON: In order to help us go through this effort much more easier, just answer the question that Mr Berger is asking. If you remember say yes, I do, if you don't remember, say I don't remember. If you know that he came more than once, tell us that he came there more than once, but I can't tell you how many times. If you know he came more than two times, tell us. No one is going to hold you onto giving us the details of these visits, how many were they. What you are being asked is mainly did he come there once, twice or how many times, do you understand the question, do you understand what is required of you now?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I understand.

CHAIRPERSON: Put the question again.

MR NOSENGA: I think he came to me twice. I think he came twice, if I am not mistaken.

CHAIRPERSON: He was there twice?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, at Leeukop.

MR BERGER: You see, what I want to suggest to you Mr Nosenga, is that he came more than twice, he came a number of times. Let me tell you what I mean.

CHAIRPERSON: Let us get a response to the first part first. What Mr Berger is saying to you is this, you say if you think, if you remember very well, you think he came twice, do you understand that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes. Yes, I understand that.

CHAIRPERSON: What Mr Berger is saying is that Mr - this is Mr Mongezi right - Mr Mongezi came to see you on more than two occasions, what do you say to that?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot dispute that, it is possible.

MR BERGER: Chairperson his full name is Mongezi Tshongweni. The first time he came to see you, was after you phoned him.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: Then he came to see you with Caroline Nichols?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, it is possible, I cannot dispute that.

MR BERGER: At that meeting you discussed your role in Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: And in brief terms, I don't want to rehash everything that has been gone through before, but at that meeting with Mongezi and Caroline, can you remember what you told them about Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I think I did tell them something, even though I cannot remember exactly what. I am saying yes, I remember I told them something.

CHAIRPERSON: Please speak up. Do not swallow your last words.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I understand sir.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you understand that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I understand sir.

MR BERGER: Do you remember talking about the involvement of the Police to them?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I told them.

MR BERGER: And do you remember talking about the involvement of Themba Khosa to them?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I told them that Themba Khosa came to the meeting, the meeting that was held two weeks before the attack and he was in the company of Peens.

MR BERGER: And then do you, or let me ask you this, your application for amnesty which is from page 1 to page 7 of Bundle R, I know you can't read, but ...

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I cannot read.

MR BERGER: That application was completed also in 1996, do you remember who helped you to complete that application?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't want to tell a lie. I cannot remember.

MR BERGER: If I tell you that it was Mongezi who helped you to complete that application, what would you say to that?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot dispute that. I cannot dispute that.

MR BERGER: That was Mongezi's third visit to you? And then Mongezi visited you a fourth time, I don't know if you remember Mongezi coming with another man?

MR LOWIES: Sorry Chair, the response to the third visit was not interpreted.

MR LAX: What do you say to what Mr Berger said that this form was filled out during the third visit by Mongezi Tshongweni to you?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I cannot dispute that, it is possible.

MR BERGER: And then a fourth visit when Mongezi came with a man, a white man?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: Mr Nosenga, if you don't remember, you must say you don't remember, but let me try and assist you. This man came from the - hang on - came from the Special Investigation Unit in Pretoria and he accompanied Mongezi to come and visit you also in 1996?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is possible.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, you keep on saying it is possible.

MR NOSENGA: I am saying it is possible, even though I cannot remember, I don't know who he was.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you remember that or don't you remember?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot say I remember that, I am saying it is possible that Mongezi came in the company of this white person because many people came to visit me.

MR BERGER: Now Mr Nosenga, I know that lots of forms and statements have been filled out from you, but I want you to try and focus on what I am going to say to you now. Remember you told the Committee last week that you applied for amnesty long ago. Do you remember that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I remember.

MR BERGER: And that when you saw Victor Mthembu on television, it was long before that that you had applied for amnesty, do you remember that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: Now what I am trying to establish is what is your application for amnesty, and I will show you what I mean. There is a bundle of papers there, Exhibit R, and I want you to look at the first ten pages. Pages 1 to 7 are the pages which Mongezi helped you to fill out and then you signed at the bottom of page 6, do you see that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I can see that.

MR BERGER: And that you did in front of a Commissioner of Oaths at Leeukop prison, in other words there was a prison official who was present when you signed at the bottom of page 6? Do you see that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I can see that.

MR BERGER: Do you remember the circumstances around which you signed this document, it would have been in 1996, September 1996?

MR NOSENGA: We went to Medium C, Leeukop, that is where this was completed.

MR BERGER: Yes, you are correct, that is exactly what happened. You see that on page 7, certainly. Now in this document, you gave certain details and when you were asked for the acts, omissions or offences for which you seek amnesty, you gave details of the killing of ANC supporters in the Vaal Triangle, at the bottom of page 2, sub-paragraph 4. I will read it to you and it will be translated for you, Mr Nosenga, you say

"... I together with people mentioned in the document, I think it is annexed hereto, were involved in killing ANC supporters in the Vaal Triangle."

Is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did say that. I referred to the Sebokeng incident.

MR BERGER: You say there ...

CHAIRPERSON: What is the answer?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I did mention that, referring to the Sebokeng incident for which I was convicted.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR BERGER: Now also in that sentence you see there is talk of "a document annexed hereto." Do you know what document was annexed?

MR NOSENGA: No, I cannot recall very well.

MR BERGER: Right, then you say

"... the first incident was in a shack which was next to a road, ANC supporters were known to frequent that place. We shot at people outside the shack in Everton."

MR NOSENGA: Maybe there was a misunderstanding. I am saying we started at Zone 12 and proceeded right through to Everton.

MR BERGER: Yes, you have said that last week

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: And it goes on to say

"... the second incident was in Sebokeng, Zone 12 where we shot at people who were waiting for busses and taxi's (drive-by shooting) ...",

what you told us last week is that the second incident was first, and the first incident, was second? In other words it was first Sebokeng and then Everton, is that right?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct, we started in Zone 12 to Zone 13, we shot people and we proceeded towards Sharpeville where we also shot at a taxi. We proceeded to Jomo's Place in Everton.

CHAIRPERSON: When it says here the first incident was in a shack, this was not the first incident, the first incident was the one that occurred in Zone 12 in Sebokeng?

MR NOSENGA: The first one happened in Zone 12 Sebokeng.

MR BERGER: Yes.

MR NOSENGA: The second one happened just as you leave Zone 12, we came across a taxi that we shot, and we went to Jomo's Place, a shebeen in a shack area. That is in Everton.

MR BERGER: Okay, so there is talk here about two incidents, but the order is wrong, am I right?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is possible.

MR LAX: No, it is not a question of being possible Mr Nosenga, you are being asked a direct question about is the order wrong of these two incidents, it is not a matter of whether it is possible, it is either yes or it is no.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, from Sebokeng right through to Small Farm and then Everton. That is the sequence.

MR BERGER: Mr Nosenga, that is why I have asked you please just try for a little bit longer to concentrate.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I understand.

MR BERGER: And both of these incidents from Sebokeng to Small Farms to Everton, they all happened on the same day?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR BERGER: On the 15th of June 1992?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR BERGER: And then you see there is another sentence here which I will read to you, it says

"... details of other incidents attached herewith."

Now, it is there, you can believe me that it is there. Remember I asked you what was in the annexure and you said you didn't know?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I said I don't know.

MR BERGER: Okay, but what I want to ask you is this, you have spoken about the incident in Everton, I beg your pardon, you have spoken about the incident in Sebokeng, Zone 12, you have spoken about Small Farms and Everton.

MR LOWIES: I have to object against the Small Farms incident, it was not discussed, or he didn't say that as it is put. Small Farms was not ...

MR BERGER: He did.

MR LAX: He just spoke about it now Mr Lowies, two seconds ago.

MR LOWIES: Sorry Chair, the way I had it is as follows, let me just clarify my objection. My objection is he did not state Small Farms in his application form, and it is suggested to him that it was, and that is the nature of the objection.

MR BERGER: Well, let me ask you Mr Nosenga, what happened at Small Farms?

MR NOSENGA: People were shot in a taxi that was pulling a trailer, I am also serving a sentence for that offence.

MR BERGER: And in Everton?

MR NOSENGA: People were shot at a shebeen.

MR BERGER: And in Sebokeng it was taxi's again?

MR NOSENGA: No, at Sebokeng people were shot at a taxi rank, where they were waiting for taxi's.

MR BERGER: Now in this sentence it says ...

CHAIRPERSON: Let me just get this straight, at Small Farms, is it Small Farms, you say people were shot at?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, they were travelling in a taxi.

CHAIRPERSON: They were in a taxi?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: And a caravan?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying this taxi was pulling a trailer.

CHAIRPERSON: Right, now at Everton?

MR NOSENGA: I shot people at a shebeen, called Jomo's Place.

CHAIRPERSON: And then at Sebokeng?

MR NOSENGA: That is where we shot people who were standing at a taxi rank, waiting for taxi's. It is a place between Zone 12 and Zone 13.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you.

MR BERGER: So Mr Nosenga, in this last sentence on page 3, paragraph 9(a)(iv), it says

"... details of other incidents attached herewith."

Now, do you know what these other incidents were?

MR NOSENGA: No, I only know of the incidents for which I am service a sentence, including the Boipatong incident.

MR BERGER: Yes, you see ...

CHAIRPERSON: What is the answer?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I only know of the incidents to which I have referred, not some of the incidents included here.

CHAIRPERSON: You only know those that are mentioned here?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I only know of the incidents pertaining to Sebokeng at a taxi rank, and Small Farms, the shebeen incident, and now you are asking me about additional incidents that are written here, I am saying I don't know anything about that. Except for the Boipatong incident, I don't know of any other incidents.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR BERGER: You see Mr Nosenga, what you have just said is what I was going to put to you, that the other incidents include the Boipatong massacre, am I right?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct, I know about that incident. I also submitted an application for amnesty pertaining to that incident.

MR BERGER: Yes, and then at the bottom of page 3, paragraph 10(a) it says "state the political objective sought to be achieved" and you say

"... we were instructed by a Mr Zulu who was the Head of IFP at Madala hostel, Vanderbijlpark, to destroy ANC comrades. He armed us with AK47's and pump guns."

MR NOSENGA: Are you referring to the Sebokeng or the Boipatong incident?

MR NOSENGA: No, I think this refers to Sebokeng, isn't it?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct, he did instruct and he commanded that we should go out, but we did not get the firearms from him, instead Darkie Chonco is the one who gave us the firearms.

CHAIRPERSON: He also gave you pump guns?

MR NOSENGA: I can still remember the AK and small guns.

CHAIRPERSON: I beg your pardon?

MR NOSENGA: No, I cannot say much about pump guns, because I don't know it.

CHAIRPERSON: It says here

"... he armed us with AK47's and pump guns."

MR NOSENGA: No, I cannot talk about the pump gun.

MR BERGER: And then it says

"... details attached herein."

In other words what that means is that there is an annexure to this application. I will leave that then. You see, remember I asked you about the document which was annexed to your application form, which you said you don't know what was annexed?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: What I want to tell you is that the document at pages 8, 9 and 10, which is the statement which was taken from you by Caroline Nichols and Mongezi Tshongweni during their visit, that statement is at 8, 9 and 10 and that is the annexure which is referred to at page 2, 3 and 4 of your amnesty application. Do you understand what I am saying Mr Nosenga, or do you want me to repeat it?

MR NOSENGA: Would you please repeat the question.

MR BERGER: What I am saying to you is the following, I am saying when Caroline and Mongezi saw you at Leeukop, Caroline took a statement. This is the statement, 8, 9 and 10, this is the statement. When Mongezi came afterwards in September, to help you with your application for amnesty, this statement at 8, 9 and 10, was annexed to your application form so that when you applied for amnesty, your application was for both Sebokeng and for Boipatong. You are nodding in agreement, what do you want to say?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: What is like that?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying I applied for amnesty pertaining to Sebokeng as well as Boipatong.

CHAIRPERSON: The statement, the unsigned affidavit at pages 8, 9 and 10, it is put to you that that statement, that affidavit represents a statement which was taken from you by Ms Nichols, I think it was, is that right, yes, Ms Nichols, what do you say to that, do you know that or do you don't?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot say I know it, the lady came to take the statement, I have forgotten the name, yes, I cannot dispute it, but yes, it was taken.

CHAIRPERSON: ... is a statement that you made to her?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: And you see, I will just explain it to you a little further Mr Nosenga, that statement was typed up in June of 1996, right June, then when Mongezi came to you in September, about three months after that, he had this statement with him which he never asked you to sign, you are quite right on that.

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR BERGER: He put the two statements together so that you could apply for amnesty for both Boipatong and Sebokeng? What I want to tell you is the one is the statement and the other is the form for amnesty, your Attorney will show you what I am talking about. That is the form, that is the statement and they were put together in September of 1996 and submitted as your application for amnesty to the TRC in Cape Town.

MR NOSENGA: I cannot dispute that.

MR BERGER: Let me ask you this Mr Nosenga, when Mongezi left you for the last time, what did you understand that he had done for you?

MR NOSENGA: I understood that he was assisting me to submit my amnesty application to the TRC.

MR BERGER: Amnesty for what?

MR NOSENGA: Because I killed people at Sebokeng as well as Boipatong.

MR BERGER: Okay. Then I want to move Mr Nosenga, I want to move from 1996 to last year, 1998. In 1996 you were at Leeukop?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR BERGER: And where were you in 1998?

MR NOSENGA: I was at Stofberg.

MR BERGER: At Groenpunt prison?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is the one.

MR BERGER: Here in the Vaal?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, here at the Vaal or in the Vaal.

MR BERGER: When you were at Stofberg, did you know what had happened to your amnesty applications?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't want to tell a lie.

MR BERGER: When was the first time that you realised that the Boipatong amnesty applications were under way?

MR NOSENGA: If I remember very well, Mr Brian came to visit me in the company of Mr Berger saying that they had been sent by Mongezi to inform me that the application is in process.

MR BERGER: Mr Nosenga, I want you to think very carefully now. You were sitting at Groenpunt prison, Stofberg?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: And something happened which made, which informed you that people were giving evidence in relation to the massacre?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct. I am saying Mr Brian informed me, I am saying Mr Brian informed me that my amnesty application is in progress.

CHAIRPERSON: What are you saying? Mr Brian came to you in prison?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, he came to me in Stofberg to inform me that the application is in progress, that is what I can remember. They told me that they had been sent by Mongezi.

CHAIRPERSON: Who accompanied Mr Brian?

MR NOSENGA: It is Mr Berger.

MR BERGER: Before that Mr Nosenga, before you even saw Mr Brian and Mr Berger, you were at Stofberg?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: Did you see something which informed you that something was happening?

MR NOSENGA: I don't want to tell a lie, I cannot recall. I cannot recall what happened?

MR BERGER: I want to remind you about your evidence last week, about seeing something on the television, on the news.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I was in Stofberg.

MR BERGER: All right, now what did you see on the news on television?

MR NOSENGA: I heard Victor Mthembu testifying to the effect that a snake gives birth to another snake and that these snakes must be killed.

MR BERGER: And you realised that he was giving evidence about what?

MR NOSENGA: About the Boipatong massacre.

MR BERGER: And how did that make you feel?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying there were Police when Boipatong was attacked, and I was involved. They were not mentioning the Police.

MR BERGER: Let me rephrase my question. You are sitting at Stofberg and you are watching television and you see on the news that Victor Mthembu is testifying in his application for amnesty in relation to the Boipatong massacre, am I right?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR BERGER: And you know that you have applied for amnesty for the Boipatong massacre, am I right?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR BERGER: But you are not there where it is happening, Victor Mthembu is there, but you are not there, am I right?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR BERGER: So what did you do Mr Nosenga?

MR NOSENGA: After Victor Mthembu had rendered his testimony and when the TRC was sitting here at Iscor Club, I came here but - after Victor Mthembu had rendered his testimony, I cannot remember whether it was on a Tuesday or Wednesday, I came here but I did not come to this venue. I think I spent most of my time outside. I think I was outside in a Police kombi, that is where I spent the whole day.

MR BERGER: Mr Nosenga, it was at this Iscor Club where you spent a day in the Police van, am I right?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: But Victor Mthembu didn't give evidence here, you see, he gave evidence at the Sebokeng College of Education, it was on a previous occasion.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I am saying he did not render his testimony here at Iscor Club, but at Sebokeng, I was not present there, I only saw that on television.

MR BERGER: Right. Now, what I am asking you is you see that the amnesty hearings are taking place without you, did you wonder to yourself why am I not there?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I wondered.

MR BERGER: And what did you do as a result of that wondering, that is what I am asking you, did you speak to someone, did you call someone? What did you do to get yourself before this Committee?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I phoned and I enquired because the Committee of the TRC was meeting at Boipatong and yet I was not part of the proceedings.

MR BERGER: Who did you phone Mr Nosenga?

MR NOSENGA: I phoned Patience if I still remember correctly.

MR BERGER: Patience worked with Mongezi at the ANC Truth Desk?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: You were trying to get hold of Mongezi, were you not, to find out why you were not before the Committee?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: But Mongezi wasn't working there any more, was he?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I was told that he had been transferred, I think he had been sent to Cape Town.

MR BERGER: And who had taken over from Mongezi, Mr Nosenga?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying it was Brian whom I was made to believe had taken Mongezi's position.

MR BERGER: You are quite right, it was Brian Mr Nosenga. What did you tell Brian over the telephone?

MR NOSENGA: I found Mongezi, he actually phoned me back and informed me that he was going to send Brian and Brian came.

MR BERGER: But what did you tell Brian over the telephone when you spoke to him?

MR NOSENGA: I told him I had submitted an application for amnesty pertaining to the Boipatong massacre because I was now concerned, the person who was handling this matter was Mongezi and now I was getting worried, it was somebody else.

MR BERGER: And did you tell Brian that you had seen on the television that the hearings were under way and that you were not there and you were worried about the fact that you were not there?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct, I told him so.

MR BERGER: What did you ask Brian to do?

MR NOSENGA: I spoke to him and I expressed my concerns to him seeing that I had submitted my application for amnesty.

CHAIRPERSON: The question is what did you ask Brian to do?

MR NOSENGA: I requested him to come over to me and he promised, indeed he came. He came if I still remember very well.

MR BERGER: So, you asked Brian to come and see you at Stofberg, is that what you say happened?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct. Because he told me that he had been informed by Mongezi about my application.

MR BERGER: And when Brian came to see you at Stofberg, he came with me, am I right?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR BERGER: And who else did he come with?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot remember, except for Mr Berger.

MR BERGER: How many of us were there who came to visit you?

MR NOSENGA: I only remember Mr Berger and Mr Brian.

MR BERGER: Do you see my colleague sitting here, Ms Cambanis? She is putting her hand up?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I can see her.

MR BERGER: She was with us when we came to visit you, do you remember that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, yes, it is possible, but I can only remember Mr Berger as well as Mr Brian. Maybe I just didn't notice her presence.

MR BERGER: You say it is possible, but you don't remember that she was there?

MR NOSENGA: I can only remember Mr Brian as well as Mr Berger very well.

MR BERGER: And did I tell you who I represented?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot remember very well.

MR BERGER: You don't remember that I said I acted for the victims of Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember very well.

MR BERGER: And did I ask you if you had a lawyer? Do you remember that?

MR NOSENGA: Sir, I don't remember. There are many things that we discussed, because Brian was also talking as well.

MR BERGER: If I were to ask you now who was your lawyer at the time that Brian and I and Ms Cambanis came to visit you, who would your lawyer have been?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying it was Mr Brian, because he had been referred to me by Mongezi.

MR BERGER: And what did we ask you about?

MR NOSENGA: I think you asked me questions pertaining to Boipatong.

MR BERGER: Do you remember if we had your statement with us?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot remember very well.

MR BERGER: Do you remember what we asked you about Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: I think you asked me as to what happened at Boipatong and I explained, mentioning the presence of the Police as well.

MR BERGER: Isn't it that we asked you about the Police specifically?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, if I remember very well, yes, you did ask me that question.

MR BERGER: And we asked you about Themba Khosa specifically?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR BERGER: And we said to you that we did not want to ask you any questions about your specific involvement that night, what you did in Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I remember. I cannot dispute that.

MR BERGER: What did you tell us that you wanted to happen, what did you say you wanted?

MR NOSENGA: I think if I still remember very well, as I was talking to Mr Brian, I indicated that I too wanted to appear before the TRC because I was involved in the Boipatong massacre, but I was not arrested.

MR BERGER: And what did Mr Brian and I say we would do?

MR NOSENGA: I think if I still remember very well, Mr Brian indicated that he was going to inform me as soon as the hearing on Boipatong assumes. I asked him or should I say I indicated to him that I would like to come before the Commission, because I was also involved in the Boipatong massacre where the Police were involved, and Mr Brian said he was going to get back to me.

MR BERGER: Mr Brian's full name is Brian Kupedi?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I think that is the one, but I just know him as Brian.

MR BERGER: And he came to see you with me and Ms Cambanis, it was on Monday the 10th of August 1998.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I said that is correct, because Brian came in the company of Mr Berger.

MR BERGER: Do you remember that we told you when the Boipatong hearings were going to start again?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot remember.

MR BERGER: They were starting the next day, the Tuesday, the 11th of August 1998.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I understand that, but I cannot remember.

MR BERGER: Okay. And do you remember that we promised you that we would give your details, your particulars and your statement to the Amnesty Committee the next day so that you could be called to come here to be an applicant?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot remember very well, so many things were discussed, I cannot remember very well really.

MR BERGER: Well, when we left you, what did you think was going to happen?

MR NOSENGA: I thought something was going to happen, I was hoping to be represented by Mr Brian because he had informed me that Mongezi had been transferred to Cape Town.

MR BERGER: You were hoping that after we left you, somehow you would come as another applicant together with the other applicants, before this Committee where Mr Brian would represent you, is that what you were hoping?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: Is it correct that we took down certain details so that you could be contacted, like your prison number, the name of the person at the prison who could be contacted, the telephone number of the prison, do you remember that discussion?

MR NOSENGA: Sir, I am saying we discussed so many things, I cannot honestly remember everything that we discussed. Yes, that is possible.

MR BERGER: What is the next thing that happened to you after our visit?

MR NOSENGA: I think it was on a Wednesday I came here in this area, this is where I met with the present legal Counsel, my present legal Counsel. I spent the whole day in a Police van on the premises of Iscor.

MR BERGER: Yes, Brian and I and Ms Cambanis, we came on the Monday and then you came here on the Wednesday, two days later, is that what you are saying?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: Mr Nosenga, I don't know if you will be able to comment on this, but just to place it on record that Mr Brian didn't have a copy of your statement on file at the ANC office, so he asked the TRC in Cape Town if they had a copy of your statement. On the 27th of July 1998 this is before Brian and Ms Cambanis and me came to see you, the TRC in Cape Town sent a fax to Brian, or to Brian's office, containing a copy of your unsigned statement which is pages 8, 9 and 10 on Exhibit R as well as a copy of the first three pages of your application form which is 1, 2 and 3 of Exhibit R. After that it didn't come out any more and that this was sent from the office of the Executive Secretary, Adv Martin Coetzee, to the ANC on that date. You wouldn't have any knowledge of that Mr Nosenga?

MR NOSENGA: No, no, I would not have knowledge of that.

MR BERGER: Now, when you came to the hearings on that Wednesday in August, the 12th of August 1998, you say you spent the whole day in a Police van?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, if I am not mistaken I spent the entire day in a Police van outside.

MR BERGER: And you saw your present legal representative, Ms Tanzer on that day, you spoke to her?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct, I spoke to her.

MR BERGER: Was there any television monitor in the Police van that day?

MR NOSENGA: No, no, I did not see it. I was just sitting there, I did not see any monitor.

MR BERGER: And after that day, you were taken back to prison, is that right?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I was taken back to Stofberg.

MR BERGER: Did you attend the hearing at any time during that session, I mean did you come back the next day to attend the hearing?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot remember, I think it was postponed or something, I cannot remember very well.

MR BERGER: Yes. You see what happened Mr Nosenga is that the hearings continued in your absence, you went back to prison but the applicants continued to give evidence during August. You never saw that, am I right?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct. I saw it on television.

MR BERGER: On the news?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, on the news.

MR BERGER: And the first time that you came to attend these hearings, it was not in this hall but in a separate room, that was during January of this year?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct. I started coming here in January.

MR BERGER: And would that have been the first time that you actually watched a television monitor, besides the news programme, that you actually watched a television monitor and saw the other applicants giving evidence?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR BERGER: Now before you came in January, do you remember that you were visited again at Stofberg, on two occasions by a tall white man with a moustache?

MR NOSENGA: No, I cannot recall.

MR BERGER: The first time that he came in December of 1998, he came with Ms Tanzer.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is possible.

MR BERGER: And the second time he came, he came without Ms Tanzer?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know which prison you are talking about, was it Stofberg or which one?

MR BERGER: Stofberg, yes. If you don't remember, you don't remember.

MR NOSENGA: No, I cannot recall.

MR BERGER: Mr Nosenga, I want to just ask you a few questions about your evidence in relation to what happened in Boipatong. Remember you - are you tired?

MR NOSENGA: No, I am not tired.

MR BERGER: Do you remember you spoke about a hostel in Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is the hostel for the residents of Boipatong.

MR BERGER: What I want to put to you is that it is no longer a hostel, it used to be a hostel. It was situated along Mosheshe, Baralong and Majola Streets. It is within Boipatong as you say, but it is not a hostel any more, it is part of the housing of Boipatong.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I don't know about that, I just know it as a hostel.

MR LAX: Mr Berger, can I just clarify something. Are you putting it to him that it wasn't a hostel at the time of the attack or that it is no longer a hostel now? I am not clear.

MR BERGER: That it was not a hostel at the time of the attack. It was formerly a hostel.

MR LAX: Do you understand the question now? Do you reply to that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I understand. I am saying I only knew it as a hostel because it is shaped into a hostel.

MR LAX: It is what, sorry, I couldn't hear.

MR NOSENGA: It has the shape of a hostel.

MR BERGER: When you were tortured in relation to the shootings in Sebokeng, is it your evidence that the Police already knew about Sebokeng and were asking you specifically about those shootings in Sebokeng?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is what I said because I was arrested in Parys and I was brought here.

MR BERGER: During that torture, were you asked any questions about Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: No, I did say that they did not make mention of Boipatong, they tortured me pertaining to the Sebokeng incident.

MR BERGER: Why did you mention the names of Papie and Mzwake?

MR NOSENGA: I said last week that I was being assaulted and tortured by these Police and I decided that I had to protect myself by implicating these people.

MR BERGER: Who is Ruben?

MR NOSENGA: He is one person who doesn't have an eye, he was here to testify.

MR BERGER: One of the applicants?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR BERGER: Did you see him on the night of the attack?

MR NOSENGA: There were many of us, some of us took different directions, but one thing that I know that people who were residing in the township in the Vaal, people who had been residing at the hostel, people who had come from the township to reside at the hostel, did not remain behind at the hostel. They were part of the attack, except for women and children.

MR BERGER: Do you know who Makuka is?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I know Makuka.

MR BERGER: Who is Makuka?

MR NOSENGA: I know Makuka from Sharpeville.

MR BERGER: Did you see him on the night of the attack?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't want to tell a lie, there were many of us.

MR BERGER: Mr Nosenga, if you were taken to Boipatong today, or taken to kwaMadala and from kwaMadala to Boipatong, would you be able to point out how you got from kwaMadala to Boipatong and where you went in Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I would be able to do that.

MR BERGER: Were you able to understand the photographs and the maps that were placed before you?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, but then I could not make out the direction pertaining to the small houses, they are very small on the map. If you can take me there, yes, I would be able to point out the route that we took from the hostel and how we entered the township.

MR BERGER: And where you went in the township?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR BERGER: After the attack on Boipatong, you told the Committee how you went back to the stadium, and after that, you went to Stikenauw’s room, do you remember that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR BERGER: What was the feeling amongst you and your friends as you were in Stikenauw’s room? Were you calm and quiet or were you excited and hyped up?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, we were excited. That is where Stikenauw actually told me that he had raped someone.

MR BERGER: Was it that same feeling at the stadium when you came back from the attack, that you were excited and hyped up?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did say that when we went to the stadium, the same feeling prevailed, that is where we drank ntelezi to cleanse ourselves. We put the firearms on the ground.

MR BERGER: As you were walking away from the stadium to the rooms, in your excited state, were you talking to one another about what had happened and what had happened during the attack?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot recall, except what Stikenauw had told me in his room. We then parted later, we parted so that we went to our individual rooms or separate rooms.

MR BERGER: But would I be correct if my understanding is this that you went to Stikenauw’s room because you and Stikenauw and others, you were still excited and were still talking about what had happened in Boipatong, would I be right?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct because he told me that he had raped.

MR BERGER: Thank you Chairperson, I have no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR BERGER

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Malindi?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR MALINDI: Thank you Chairperson. Mr Nosenga, you testified about a garage that was burnt and you said it was burnt by members of the ANC?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did mention that.

MR MALINDI: And that is according to the comrades that detained you in that toilet?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR MALINDI: What was your relationship with the people that it was said were responsible for the burning of the garage?

MR NOSENGA: These people were my friends in the township. I was not a member of the ANC.

MR MALINDI: So your ANC background in brief is that you were friends with the ANC?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct sir.

MR MALINDI: In your application you state that you were a member of AmaButho?

MR NOSENGA: No, I said I don't know AmaButho, I was in a group that attacked Boipatong, I was a follower of the IFP.

MR MALINDI: It is your evidence that you were a member of Gatiza's gang, is it not so?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I used to accompany Gatiza.

MR MALINDI: Was there only one such gang in kwaMadala or were there several?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying Gatiza and myself were friends, he had friends from the township, people like myself, from the township.

CHAIRPERSON: You have just said that you didn't say that - you don't know AmaButho.

MR NOSENGA: No, I said I don't know AmaButho. I am saying it is possible yes, there were AmaButho at the hostel, but I don't know them. I would like the statement about AmaButho to be read to me.

CHAIRPERSON: It is in your application which you signed, which you have now told us was completed by Mr Mongezi, in paragraph 7(b), you were asked the capacity in which you served in the organisation which you had mentioned as being the IFP and you stated that you were an ordinary member, a part of AmaButho in the IFP Youth Brigade.

MR NOSENGA: I dispute that. Yes, I did mention the fact that I was a member of the IFP.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you say that you were part of the Youth Brigade?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, the IFP Youth Brigade.

CHAIRPERSON: You were part of that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I was a member of that, but I didn't have any position. No, I don't know AmaButho.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR MALINDI: In your application at page 13, paragraph 10(d)...

MR LAX: Mr Malindi, he denies that document, page 13 but please continue.

MR MALINDI: Thank you Mr Lax. Mr Nosenga, you testified that you went on a few attacks launched from kwaMadala, for example the Sebokeng attack, Small Farms, Everton and Boipatong.

MR NOSENGA: That is correct. That is where I was involved.

MR MALINDI: Do you know if other residents of kwaMadala were involved in other different, other attacks different to the ones that you were involved in?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, it is possible, but there were different groups and people would go out on their own as small groups, maybe they are involved, but what I know is that I was involved in the Sebokeng incident.

MR MALINDI: I would refer you to Exhibit U and in particular page 7 thereof, paragraph 3 thereof if the Chairperson and the Committee members have that document, paragraph 3 thereof states the following in Afrikaans

"... Op 15 Februarie 1992 is verdagte swart man Andries Nosenga, deur my gearresteer ..."

If that date is read together with the statement that appears on page 1 of Exhibit U ...

INTERPRETER: Chairperson, sorry for the interruption, may please the same line be read so as to be interpreted into Zulu?

MR MALINDI: What appears on page 7, paragraph 3 translated into English

"... On the 15th of February 1992, I arrested a suspect, a black man, Andries Nosenga ...",

and it is a statement by Mr Ferreira. That date, read with what is on the statement which appears on page 1 and the statement that appears on page 4, is clearly wrong, it should be 1993. Do you agree that you were arrested on the 15th of February 1993?

MR NOSENGA: Sir, I was arrested in 1993, I do not have a recollection of the date.

MR LAX: Sorry Mr Malindi, the date on page 4 is the 15th of October 1993?

MR MALINDI: Yes, you are right Mr Lax, I am sorry about that. And also on page 1, it is also 15 October 1993, but on Mr Ferreira's statement, what then appears subsequently, it will be clear that the date of 15 February should have been 1993, because it then refers to incidents that could not have happened in February of 1992. Chairperson, I will not take it further, the document is before the Committee if there is any point to be argued about when he was arrested and what the effect thereof will be, it will be argued. Then lastly Mr Nosenga, when Mr Lowies was cross-examining you, he asked you a lot of questions about why you applied for amnesty for something that you have not been convicted for and questions to the effect why you apply for something that you had not been arrested for, or questioned about at the time of your arrest for the Sebokeng matter. Do you know what will happen to your present imprisonment if you are granted amnesty for those incidents?

MR NOSENGA: Would you please repeat the question.

MR MALINDI: You have applied for amnesty for the Sebokeng incidents as well?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR MALINDI: You are serving 14 years at the present moment?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR MALINDI: If you apply for amnesty and you are granted amnesty, what would you benefit out of amnesty being granted?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know.

MR MALINDI: Are you hoping that you won't serve the 14 years, you may be released before the end of the 14 years?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, yes, that is correct.

MR MALINDI: And if you are granted amnesty for the Boipatong incident, what are you hoping to benefit?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I was not sentenced for the Boipatong incident, but I was involved, that is why I have decided to come forward to apply for amnesty. I will be very happy if I can be granted amnesty.

CHAIRPERSON: ... is this, you are serving a term in prison, 14 years, for the Sebokeng killings?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: And if you are being granted amnesty in respect of that killing, you hope that you are not going to serve the 14 year period, right?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct. I say yes, that is possible because that is what I was convicted for.

CHAIRPERSON: You were not convicted of the Boipatong massacre?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I was not convicted.

CHAIRPERSON: You are not serving any time for it?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: What are you going to benefit if amnesty is granted?

MR NOSENGA: I said I would be very pleased if I could be granted amnesty in that regard.

MR MALINDI: Are you hoping that you won't be arrested and charged for that incident separately?

MR NOSENGA: Sir, I volunteered information on my own, pertaining to the Sebokeng incident, I came forward, I was not arrested for that incident. There are many people who were not arrested.

MR MALINDI: Thank you, thank you Chairperson, no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MALINDI

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Cambanis, are you going to be very long?

MS CAMBANIS: Not at all, no questions, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: I beg your pardon?

MS CAMBANIS: No questions whatsoever, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you.

NO CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS CAMBANIS

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mapoma?

MR MAPOMA: There is only one issue Mr Chairperson, that I am going to ask questions about.

MR BERGER: Sorry Mr Chairperson, I've got a note from your Registrar that Mr Mey still has to cross-examine.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, we know that. Very well, do you have any questions?

MR MEY: Yes Chairperson, only one issue.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you going to be fairly long on that issue?

MR MEY: Not really.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, well perhaps we should take an adjournment at this stage. We will come back at two o'clock.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ANDRIES MATANZIMA NOSENGA: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes Mr Mey and for the record, would you indicate who you are representing?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR MEY: Thank you Mr Chairperson, I am acting on behalf of Mr Chaka and Rooikop and I am David Mey.

CHAIRPERSON: What are the full names of Chaka?

MR MEY: Mr Chairperson, I am sorry, my headset is not working at this stage. Thank you, Mr Nosenga - I am sorry Mr Chairperson, Chaka's surname is Chaka, his full name is Tickey Sidney Chaka and Rooikop ...

CHAIRPERSON: Just give us those names again, the first.

MR MEY: The first one is Tickey Sidney Chaka.

CHAIRPERSON: How do you spell this Chaka?

MR MEY: Chaka. And Rooikop's name is Gerhardus Johannes Greeff. Thank you. Mr Nosenga, when was the first time that you had met Mr Chaka?

MR NOSENGA: I knew him from the township, I do not recall just exactly where I met him, but he stayed at Zone 6 at Sebokeng.

MR MEY: Was that prior to your residence in the hostel, in kwaMadala hostel?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR MEY: How did you meet him in Zone 6, Sebokeng?

MR NOSENGA: I used to see him around the township because I used to have relatives in Zone 7.

MR MEY: At that stage, did you ever speak to him or had a conversation with him?

MR NOSENGA: I just know him by sight. I never spoke to him at that point.

MR MEY: And at that stage, he was still a member of the Green Beans, the Municipal Police, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is what I knew him to be at that time.

MR MALINDI: We did not get the last part of his answer.

CHAIRPERSON: Is there a problem with the interpretation?

INTERPRETER: I do not think so, there was not anything said.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, can you hear the Interpreter?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I do. Yes, I can hear her now.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR MEY: I will repeat the question Mr Nosenga, at that time he was still part of the Green Beans, known as the Municipal Police, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I said that is so. He was a member of the Green Beans, but later on joined the SAP and then after that, joined the Murder and Robbery Unit in Vanderbijl.

MR MEY: Do I understand you correctly that you also know, or are you in a position to tell this Committee when he joined the Police or the Police Force?

MR NOSENGA: No, I do not know when he joined.

MR MEY: Did he join the Police Force long before the Boipatong massacre on the 17th of June 1992?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, by the time the Boipatong massacre took place, he was a member of the Murder and Robbery Unit.

MR MEY: Can you indicate, in months, how many months or years before the Boipatong massacre, he joined the Police, that means from the Municipal Police to the South African Police Services?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot tell a lie, I do not know.

MR MEY: Before the day of the massacre on the 17th of June, except for now knowing him from Zone 6, did you meet him at any other occasion?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, when I had, after I had been arrested by Peens, at Flora Gardens, I said I knew Chaka from long ago. At that time I did not even know where he stayed.

MR MEY: If you say after the time you had been arrested by Peens at Flora Gardens, what did Chaka do there, what did he do to you, what happened?

MR NOSENGA: I said I don't remember what Chaka did. The only person that assaulted me, was Peens.

MR MEY: Peens assaulted you after you had been arrested, Chaka did nothing to you, that was your evidence prior to this.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I said the person who assaulted me, was Peens, not Chaka, I do not remember what he did.

MR MEY: If you say you do not remember what he did, is it possible then that he assaulted you?

MR NOSENGA: I said I do not remember, because there were other Police Officers who were assaulting me, but the person that I remember accurately, is Peens.

MR MEY: Anyone else?

MR NOSENGA: As I said before, I remember Peens.

MR MEY: Rooikop, was he present when you were arrested at Flora Gardens?

MR NOSENGA: Rooikop was present when I was arrested for robbery, but he was not present when I was arrested in connection with the vehicle.

MR MEY: So do I understand you correct now, he was not present when you were assaulted by Peens?

MR NOSENGA: When I was arrested by Peens in connection with the vehicle, Chaka was the only person present, Rooikop was not there. I only saw Rooikop when I was arrested in connection with robbery. I did not see him there.

MR MEY: Was Chaka present when you were arrested for the robbery?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember. But I saw him when I was arrested for the vehicle.

MR MEY: And Rooikop did nothing to you when you were arrested for the robbery?

MR NOSENGA: No. They were busy with other things, because I was not the only person who was arrested, there were other suspects that I was held with.

MR MEY: With reference to Chaka, after the arrest for the vehicle by Peens, when did you meet again with Chaka?

MR NOSENGA: I met him in Boipatong.

MR MEY: When was that?

MR NOSENGA: On the 17th of June 1992, in the evening, that is in the veld. We were in the company of Chaka and them as we went into Boipatong.

MR MEY: Are you sure about that?

MR NOSENGA: I would not fabricate these things, we did meet him on the 17th.

MR MEY: But prior to the 17th, between the 17th and the arrest for the vehicle, you did not meet with Chaka?

MR NOSENGA: No, I did not.

MR MEY: Are you sure?

MR NOSENGA: Yes. I did not see him thereafter, until the 17th of June. I last saw him when I was arrested by Peens, thereafter I just saw him on the 17th.

MR MEY: Rooikop, after his presence when you were arrested for the robbery, did you ever see him again?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did. I saw him on the evening of the 17th.

MR MEY: Also in the veld?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, we all went together to attack.

MR MEY: Prior to the 17th of June 1992 and his presence when you were arrested for the robbery, did you ever see him between those two dates or incidents?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I had seen him before when I was arrested for robbery in Flora Gardens.

CHAIRPERSON: What Mr Mey is asking you is you saw Rooikop at the time when you were arrested for robbery you said?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is what I said.

CHAIRPERSON: And then you said the next time you saw him was on the 17th?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: What he wants to find out is between the time when you saw him during your arrest for robbery and the 17th, did you see Rooikop during that space of time?

MR NOSENGA: No, the only people that I saw, were Peens and Chaka, but I did not see Rooikop.

MR MEY: Thank you Mr Chairperson. Mr Nosenga, will you clarify to the Committee that your evidence during cross-examination when you testified, or cross-examination of Mr Lowies, when you testified that you did see Chaka after your arrest for the vehicle, being the time when you had been visited by Peens and Chaka at Vereeniging?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, sir, I did indicate that Chaka and Peens visited me in Vereeniging, but I did not mention Rooikop.

CHAIRPERSON: Just a minute, when Chaka and Rooikop, did you say they visited you in jail?

MR NOSENGA: No sir, I said it was Peens and Chaka who visited me in the prison.

CHAIRPERSON: When Chaka and Peens visited you in jail, was that after the massacre, the Boipatong massacre?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR MEY: Thank you. Mr Nosenga, the night of the incident, on the 17th of June 1992, prior to that you were told that the Police will give you some assistance with the attack?

MR NOSENGA: I said I do not remember, but the person who had been present at a meeting that was held two weeks prior the attack, was Peens and Themba Khosa.

MR MEY: My question was, you were told that the Police will give you some assistance with the attack, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: I am not in a position to respond to that question, I do not know, but when we went to attack, we were in the company of the Police and they were in casspirs.

MR MEY: Did you ever see that Rooikop supplied weapons to Mr Themba Khosa?

MR NOSENGA: No, I do not know anything about that. I have been questioned on it before and I have said the same thing before.

MR MEY: The night of the attack, 17th of June, the Boipatong massacre, when you met the Police with the casspirs in the veld, can you indicate the distance that the casspirs were away from the township?

MR NOSENGA: I am not in a position to estimate the distance, but they were not that far away. That road towards Vanderbijlpark is not that far from the veld.

MR MEY: When you got to the casspirs, where was Chaka?

MR NOSENGA: He was there.

MR MEY: Inside the casspir or outside?

MR NOSENGA: They were standing outside the casspirs.

MR MEY: What clothes was he wearing?

MR NOSENGA: I do not remember well, the one person that I remember is Peens.

MR MEY: Was his face camouflaged?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, he wore a balaclava, but he did not paint his face with any substance, it was only the white Police Officers who had painted their faces.

MR MEY: And Rooikop, where was he when you got there?

MR NOSENGA: He was also amongst them. I got into a casspir that Rooikop was also travelling in.

MR MEY: When you got there, was Rooikop outside the casspir?

MR NOSENGA: I said most Officers were outside the casspirs, and I did not know some of them.

MR MEY: But you do know Rooikop?

MR NOSENGA: I did not notice him when I arrived, but when we got inside the casspir, I did see him there inside.

MR MEY: Where was he sitting or standing?

MR NOSENGA: He was sitting at the back.

MR MEY: Right at the back or in the middle of the casspir?

MR NOSENGA: He was seated at the back, right at the entrance. I do not know how to explain it, the others were seated in front of the casspir.

MR MEY: Who entered the casspir first?

MR NOSENGA: I do not recall.

MR MEY: Was it the Police or the hostel residents?

MR NOSENGA: I said I do not remember sir, I will not commit myself, but I also went into the casspir, but I cannot say whether it was the Police or the hostel residents who went in first.

MR MEY: Can you remember what clothes Rooikop wore that night?

MR NOSENGA: I said I do not remember.

MR MEY: Why do you specifically know what clothes Peens wore that night?

MR NOSENGA: I saw him, because we were in one casspir.

MR MEY: What was the clothes he was wearing?

MR NOSENGA: Who?

MR MEY: Peens?

MR NOSENGA: He wore a white shirt and jeans.

MR MEY: Was it a long sleeve or a short sleeve shirt?

MR NOSENGA: It was short sleeved.

MR MEY: Did he wear a jacket or a jersey?

MR NOSENGA: No, I just saw him wearing a white shirt.

MR MEY: Was he the only one wearing a short sleeve shirt?

MR NOSENGA: He is the only person that I noticed, I do not remember with regards to the others.

MR MEY: You told the Committee the reason you know that Peens wore a short sleeve white shirt and a jeans, was because you were with him in the casspir.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I noticed him but I did not notice what the others were wearing. If I had noticed what they were wearing, I would be able to tell you.

MR MEY: But that is my question Mr Nosenga, it is strange that you have noticed Peens' clothes, and you are not in a position to tell the Committee what clothes the other people were wearing?

MR NOSENGA: As I have stated before, if I had noticed them, I would be in a position to explain what they were wearing, but Peens was the only person that I noticed.

MR MEY: Sorry, I don't understand you now. Are you saying if you had noticed them, or if you noticed their clothes?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mey, this is not - waste time on it, the man, the person that he noticed was Peens. What else do you want him to say? If he did notice the others, he would have told us.

MR MEY: Mr Chairperson, if I do understand correctly, he testified that he noticed Peens and his clothes, but he also testified that he noticed Chaka and Rooikop in the casspir and if I do understand his evidence correct now, he also testified the reason for him noticing the clothes of Peens, was the fact that he saw him in the casspir. My question now is if the other two were in the casspir, why didn't he notice their clothes?

CHAIRPERSON: What is it that you wanted him to notice? He has told us that they were in the casspir, are you asking him why didn't he take note of what they were wearing?

MR MEY: Yes Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Do you have any reason why you didn't notice what the others were wearing who were inside the casspir?

MR NOSENGA: As I said before, if I had noticed what they were wearing, I would be in a position to tell today, but the one person that I noticed, whose clothes I noticed, was Peens. I just saw the others wearing balaclavas, but I did not notice what they were wearing. Therefore I cannot say or try to explain what they were wearing.

MR MEY: Thank you. What was the colour of Rooikop's hair?

MR NOSENGA: White hair or blond.

MR MEY: I want to refer you to Exhibit R, page 20, paragraph 14, the last sentence thereof

"... Rooikop had a very light complexion, almost like an Albino, red hair, thin and was about 170 to 175 cm's tall ..."

MR NOSENGA: I do not know about that, Rooikop had blond hair, he is thin, he does not have red hair, but blond hair.

MR MEY: Did you, when you made this statement, did you also correct this when it was read to you or when it was interpreted?

MR NOSENGA: It is possible that I was not properly quoted, because as I said before, the Interpreter did not speak fluent Zulu, but Rooikop has blond hair.

MR MEY: On the way to the township, Chaka and Rooikop didn't say a word, is that correct, on your version?

MR NOSENGA: I said I do not recall. They were conversing, but I do not remember, I do not know what they were saying, they were speaking in English.

MR MEY: Did they say anything, but you didn't know what they were saying?

MR NOSENGA: If they were conversing, I did not hear them.

MR MEY: When you got to the first house, you got out of the casspir with the other hostel residents, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR MEY: Did you immediately enter the house?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, the casspir was driving very slowly and Peens and the rest of the Officers, were shooting at the people in the streets, while we went into the houses.

MR MEY: Who were the Officers who shot at the people in the street?

MR NOSENGA: It was Peens and others.

MR LOWIES: I can't hear a word.

MR LAX: Peter, we need another headset up here, there is a spare one here actually.

MR LOWIES: Sorry Chairperson.

MR LAX: Is that better Mr Lowies, can you hear us?

MR LOWIES: Thank you.

MR MEY: You said Peens and other Officers were shooting at the People, do you know any of the other Officers who shot at the people?

MR NOSENGA: One of them was Chaka. I did say that.

MR MEY: Did you see Rooikop shooting at the people?

MR NOSENGA: I was not in a position to see the other Officers.

MR MEY: Why not?

MR NOSENGA: I was also going about my business and I would only see them if for instance I was coming out of a house or something like that.

MR MEY: The other people which were in your group, in the same casspir, the first house, did they enter the house with you or did some of them say behind in the street?

MR NOSENGA: I did say that it was three people who went into the house and others remained outside.

MR MEY: What did the others do on the outside, shooting at the house or at the people in the street, or what were they doing?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mey, are you asking about the Police Officers or are you asking about the persons who were with him?

MR MEY: I asked about the persons who were with him.

CHAIRPERSON: Please bear in mind that we have covered this ground.

MR MEY: Thank you Mr Chairperson. Are you in a position to tell this Committee what the other persons in your group did, while you were in the house?

MR NOSENGA: As I said before, the three of us went inside the house and others remained outside. We went inside the house and started shooting at the people.

MR MEY: The reason why I am asking you this is because you have testified that the others on the outside, were shooting at the house.

MR NOSENGA: Sir, I said the three of us went inside and others remained on the premises, outside the house.

CHAIRPERSON: What is being put to you and please listen to the question, what is being put to you is that you testified that whilst you were inside the house, the persons, some of the persons who were with you in the group, remained outside and were shooting at the house. Did you say that or didn't you say that?

MR NOSENGA: He is not asking his questions properly. At the first house, three people went in and two remained outside. There were people who were fleeing from the house, from inside the house and these other two persons, were shooting at those people.

CHAIRPERSON: What is the answer to the question?

MR NOSENGA: The only person that I saw shooting, was Dondo.

CHAIRPERSON: What is being put to you is that you told us earlier on that whilst you were inside the house, the people who were outside the house who were in your group, were shooting at the house, did you say that or didn't you say that? If you answer the question, we will get onto the ...

MR NOSENGA: They were shooting outside, not inside. We are the only people who went inside the house, the Police were shooting in the street.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR MEY: Was Chaka, when he shot at the people, was he in the casspir or outside of the casspir?

MR NOSENGA: I said they would get off the casspir because it was driving slowly and they would shoot at the people.

MR MEY: At no stage you saw Rooikop getting off the casspir?

MR NOSENGA: I said I cannot recall seeing him, the only people I recall are Peens and Chaka.

ADV SIGODI: Sorry, where did you see Mr Chaka when he was shooting, where was he?

MR NOSENGA: They got off the casspir, shot at the people in the street, and then returned to the casspir, he was outside the casspir.

ADV SIGODI: What I am asking, I am asking about Mr Chaka and in your answer you keep on saying "they". Did you see Mr Chaka shooting?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did see him.

ADV SIGODI: Where was he?

MR NOSENGA: He was outside the casspir, on the main street in the township.

MR MEY: Was he using a rifle or a handgun or what was he using?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know, but it was a small gun.

MR MEY: When you got to the casspirs in the veld, you testified that the presence of Chaka and Rooikop made you think that the people in the casspir, were Policemen.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did say so. Rooikop was present as well as other Officers, including the one who was driving, whom I did not know.

MR MEY: Mr Nosenga, through what door did you enter the casspir?

MR NOSENGA: The casspir only has three doors, two in front and one at the back, and I got in through the back.

MR MEY: In cross-examination by Mr Lowies, you said the casspir had a side door and that that is the one you entered.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, there is a side door, and that is the door through which I got into the casspir.

MR MEY: Where is that door?

MR NOSENGA: At the side, as the applicant is indicating, the other two doors are in front.

MR MEY: If I understand you correct now, the casspir’s got two doors in the front and a side door?

MR NOSENGA: It has two doors in front.

CHAIRPERSON: And where is that door?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot specify, but I know that it is at the side.

CHAIRPERSON: It is not at the back of the casspir? what? You are being asked now about the casspir and that is what we want you to tell us about, where is this door that you are talking about, is it at the back or is it on the side?

MR NOSENGA: It is a side door.

MR MEY: Except for the front doors, there is a side door and that is the door through which you entered, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

ADV SIGODI: Sorry and is that side door towards the rear end of the casspir, is that what you mean?

MR NOSENGA: The door is on the side of the casspir, not at the back. It is at the side of the casspir.

ADV SIGODI: Towards the end of the casspir?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, it is possible that it is towards the back.

MR MEY: Mr Nosenga, I want to clarify this now. The casspir’s got two front doors, do you agree?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct. It does have two front doors.

MR MEY: That is right at the front of the casspir, is that correct, at the cabin?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, the front doors are right in front.

MR MEY: You did not make use of that or any one of those doors, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: No, I only used the side door.

MR MEY: Was there a back door?

MR NOSENGA: It is on the side, I did not use the front doors and there was a side door which I used.

MR MEY: You have also indicated that you have driven in a casspir previously to the night of the incident, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is so. I was taken in a casspir when I was being investigated with regards to the Sebokeng incident.

MR MEY: It is the same vehicle as the one that you were in on the night of the incident, the Boipatong massacre, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, it is the same.

MR MEY: I want to put it to you that a casspir has no side doors, except for the doors at the cabin, its got a back door.

MR NOSENGA: I do not know sir, because I entered through a side door.

CHAIRPERSON: What is being put to you is that the motor vehicle described as a casspir, does not have a side door, it has two doors in front for the driver and the passenger to sit and then one at the back, do you understand that? Do you understand what I have just described to you?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you saying that the casspir on which you travelled, had a side door?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, it is a side door, next to the driver's seat.

MR MEY: The colour of the casspirs were yellow?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: The casspir on which you were travelling, had a side door next to the driver's seat?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, it will be the driver's door and then the side door.

MR LAX: Can I just ask a question. Apart from the driver's door and this side door next to the driver, presumably for the driver's passenger, did I understand you correctly?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, as in a taxi.

MR LAX: There is no other door in this vehicle?

MR NOSENGA: I noticed the side door, the one that I used to get into the casspir.

MR LAX: But there is no other door besides those two doors that you noticed? Have I understood you correctly?

MR NOSENGA: No, I only saw three doors. The driver, the side door and the other one on the other side.

MR LAX: Which other side, that is the whole question that we are trying to work out now?

MR NOSENGA: There is a side door as you would find in a taxi.

MR LAX: And that is different from the driver and the driver's passenger, is that what you are saying?

MR NOSENGA: The other two are the driver and the passenger's doors.

MR LAX: So this door, similar to the one you find in a taxi, is that right next to the passenger's door like on a normal kombi, the front passenger's door?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LAX: And that door is not near the back of the vehicle?

MR NOSENGA: No.

MR LAX: Thank you. Carry on Mr Mey.

MR MEY: Thank you. Mr Nosenga, is that side door, is that then on the left hand side of the casspir, on the right hand side?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know, I will not commit myself. I cannot say whether it is the left or right hand side.

MR MEY: The roof of the casspir in which you were travelling, at the back, was it open or was it closed?

CHAIRPERSON: What do you mean the roof of the casspir was open or closed, is this a convertible casspir?

MR MEY: I will rephrase my question as follows Mr Chairman, did the casspir in which you were travelling, had a roof or not?

MR NOSENGA: It had a closed roof. On the sides, it had windows, but it was, the roof was closed.

MR MEY: Do you know whether that roof can open or not?

MR NOSENGA: I am not in a position to say.

MR MEY: The colour of the casspirs were yellow according to you?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: You are back to that practice of mumbling, just speak up, we want to hear what you are saying sir.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, they were yellow in colour like the Police vans.

MR MEY: Any other marks or stripes on the casspir that can identify them as a Police vehicle?

MR NOSENGA: I just noticed the colour, the yellow colour.

CHAIRPERSON: Apart from the yellow colour, are there any other colour by which you could identify it?

MR NOSENGA: No, it was just the windows.

MR MEY: There were no Police stars on the casspirs, is that correct?

INTERPRETER: Please repeat that question.

MR MEY: There were no Police stars on the casspir at any place, which you recognised?

MR NOSENGA: It had a microphone that they used to communicate with, that is how I recognised that it was a Police vehicle.

MR MEY: Because it had a microphone?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that was what the Police communicated with.

MR MEY: Was that microphone used that night?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't remember.

MR MEY: Where did you notice the microphone?

MR NOSENGA: I saw it hanging on the roof, or from the roof, of the vehicle in front of the vehicle, inside.

MR MEY: To get back to my original question, did you see any Police stars on the vehicle, any stickers or any other stripes except for the yellow colour of the casspir?

MR NOSENGA: No, I cannot recall, except that I could make out that it belonged to the Police, due to the window shields and its make up.

MR MEY: How do you recognise it as a Police vehicle due to the window shields?

CHAIRPERSON: What is the question?

MR MEY: Mr Chairperson, he testified, he just answered the question by saying he recognised it as being a Police vehicle from the window shields. What I want to know is, how - what is it on the window shields that makes it a Police vehicle? Is there anything specific to the window shields?

MR NOSENGA: Would you - this vehicle had a window grid.

CHAIRPERSON: Isn't he talking about, are you talking about the mesh wire that is on the side of the window?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, it has something that is round like on the end.

MR MEY: When the statement was taken from you, the one which you signed Exhibit R, pages 18 to 22, did you tell Mr Kjellberg that Chaka shot at people in the streets?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did. I am saying there was a communication problem between myself and the Interpreter, but yes, I did tell him that he used to get out of the vehicle and shoot people on the street.

MR MEY: Was that part of your evidence, what you were telling Mr Kjellberg, was it ever read back to you?

MR NOSENGA: I cannot recall.

MS TANZER: Mr Chairman, if I may, I think the applicant does not know who Mr Kjellberg is and if Mr Kjellberg was pointed out to him, he might recognise Mr Kjellberg. The name Kjellberg is not a name that he knows or can identify with.

CHAIRPERSON: The witness is being asked about the statement R18, which he has acknowledged to be his statement, that is what he is being asked about and I think I heard him say that I had mentioned it, there was a misunderstanding with the Interpreter. What is the point you are making?

MS TANZER: No the point is, there are many references to a Kjellberg and I am just saying that Mr Kjellberg's name is not a name that he knows. His name is not identifiable to him.

CHAIRPERSON: He has - this statement was never read to him?

MS TANZER: That is not what I am saying Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: I am asking you, is that what you are saying that this statement was never read to him?

MS TANZER: No, that is not what I am saying.

CHAIRPERSON: Even during consultation as well?

MS TANZER: The statement has been read to him.

MR MEY: Mr Nosenga, was it ever when a statement was read back to you, was it ever mentioned that Chaka was shooting in Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know, but I am saying Chaka was shooting.

MR MEY: The reason why I am asking this, I am referring to Exhibit R, page 21, paragraph 20, and I am going to read it

"... Peens also shot people, he shot from the casspir."

MR NOSENGA: Peens would get off the casspir, walk on foot and shoot people on the street or in the street.

MR MEY: It was never mentioned, or it is not in writing in that statement which you signed, that Chaka got off the casspir and shot at people.

MR NOSENGA: I had a problem with the Interpreter, because look, I indicated that the person who used to get off the casspir to shoot people in the street, was Peens.

MR MEY: Mr Nosenga, but you have also testified that you corrected them when something was written that was not correct, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: I was rectifying mistakes in several statements.

MR MEY: Several statements? Is that what you are saying now, several statements?

MR NOSENGA: There are several of them, I do not know.

MR MEY: How many statements did you make?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, what is being put to you is that you told us that the statement was read to you and that you corrected anything that you didn't agree with in the statement as it was read back to you. You did tell us that, did you?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you have to correct this Interpreter on more than one occasion?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR MEY: After it was corrected, was it read back to you?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR MEY: And were you satisfied then with the contents thereof?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR MEY: Why did you sign the statement referred to in Exhibit R, pages 18 to 22?

MR NOSENGA: I signed the statement because I am applying for amnesty.

MR MEY: When the statement, Exhibit R, pages 18 to 20 was read - let me ask you this, was it read back to you after it was finished and written down or typed, at any stage?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, it was read back to me.

MR MEY: Were you happy with it, with the contents thereof?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR MEY: Are you sure?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR MEY: But how do you explain then all these discrepancies in the statement, according to your evidence, that you gave here before the Committee which was put to you in cross-examination by various Counsel?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know.

MR MEY: Mr Nosenga, all I want to establish at this stage is previously you said there was a misunderstanding.

CHAIRPERSON: He says he doesn't know, what else must he say now.

MR MEY: I will leave it there.

CHAIRPERSON: That is the answer to the question.

MR MEY: Mr Nosenga, where - can I ask you this, where your evidence differs from the statement which was signed, Exhibit R pages 18 to 22, the correct version is your evidence that you gave here before the Committee, now what is written in your statement?

MR NOSENGA: It is the evidence that I rendered on Monday.

MR MEY: Last week Monday?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

MR MEY: That was your evidence in chief?

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mey, the witness must be referring to the evidence that he has given us here, his evidence was not only given on Monday. He has been a witness for the passed five days, this is the sixth day on the witness stand.

MR MEY: Mr Nosenga, when Peens and Chaka visited you at Vereeniging, where were you held?

MR NOSENGA: I was held at the Vereeniging Police station, I was kept in a solitary cell.

MR MEY: And they visited you in the cell, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, they came to me in the cell.

MR MEY: And who did the talking?

MR NOSENGA: Peens was talking, I am saying Peens was saying that they were going to kill me in case I mentioned anything about the Boipatong incident.

MR MEY: Was he the only one who spoke to you?

MR NOSENGA: Chaka also spoke, Peens was not alone, he was in the company of Chaka.

MR MEY: What did Chaka say?

MR NOSENGA: He was reiterating what Peens was saying.

MR MEY: Was that all that had happened there?

MR NOSENGA: Yes. That is how they threatened me.

MR MEY: In what car did they come to the Police station in Vereeniging?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know, I was incarcerated.

CHAIRPERSON: You mean when he was held, when he was being held in solitary confinement, do you seriously expect him to tell you what car they came in?

MR MEY: Mr Chairperson, he indicated previously in his evidence that they arrived there with a Sierra vehicle, that was his evidence.

CHAIRPERSON: What is being put to you is that previously you told us that they came to Vereeniging Police station in a Sierra?

MR NOSENGA: No sir, I did not say that. I said they came to me when I was arrested, I did not know what vehicle they were using.

MR MEY: I put it to you that you have testified that they came in a Sierra vehicle.

MR NOSENGA: No, I was arrested, I could not have seen the vehicle they were using.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you saying that you could not see in what car they were travelling because you were in detention?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I was in detention, I was in the Police cells, so I could not have seen the vehicle they were using.

MR MEY: I will leave it there, what I want to know from you is, at no previous occasion, except for the threat in Vereeniging cells, you were tortured by Chaka, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: Would you please repeat the question sir.

MR MEY: Except for the threat after the Boipatong massacre at Vereeniging Police station by Chaka, you were never tortured by him?

MR NOSENGA: No, was only tortured in Vereeniging and the people who tortured me were people from Houtkop. The people who tortured me were the people who were in charge of my case in Sebokeng, yes, it Houtkop in Sebokeng. The people who tortured me, was Chaka and that was the last time, here in Vereeniging.

MR MEY: Did Chaka torture you in Vereeniging?

MR NOSENGA: I am saying they did not torture me, they threatened me.

MR MEY: Did Rooikop at any stage, torture you?

MR NOSENGA: I don't remember him torturing me.

MR MEY: I just want to get back to one point, now during cross-examination you said that Rooikop was not present when you were arrested for the car theft, whilst previously you testified that he was present, but he did not torture you.

MR NOSENGA: I am saying he was present when I was arrested for robbery. I said the person who was present when I was arrested for a vehicle, was Chaka. Rooikop was only present when I was arrested for robbery and he did not torture me.

MR MEY: Mr Nosenga, you did testify that he was present with your arrest for the vehicle case.

MR NOSENGA: No, no, I only spoke about Chaka pertaining to the motor vehicle offence.

MR MEY: When Rooikop was present during the robbery, he did not speak to you at all, is that correct?

CHAIRPERSON: This man did not testify that Rooikop was present during the robbery.

MR MEY: I am sorry Mr Chairperson, when you were arrested for the robbery case and Rooikop was present, did he speak to you at all or at any stage during that happenings?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't recall. The one person who was busy attending to me, was Peens.

MR MEY: How many times did Mr Mongezi visit you?

MR NOSENGA: I don't know sir, I cannot recall. He did come to pay me a visit.

MR MEY: A visit or was it more than once?

CHAIRPERSON: Haven't we covered that with Mr Berger?

MR MEY: Yes Your Worship, I am sorry Mr Chairperson, the reason why I am asking this is at that stage he was led by Mr Berger on how many occasions he was visited by Mr Mongezi. I want to know from Mr Nosenga personally how many times he can recall Mr Mongezi visiting him.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that relevant to the question whether or not Peens was present at the, during the Boipatong massacre, I mean whether Rooikop or Chaka was present during the incident?

MR MEY: Yes Mr Chairperson, the reason for that being and I will come to it now, with reference to Exhibit R, pages 3 and 4 thereof, details of other incidents attached herewith, details attached herein. I will get back to that now, I just want to know first, establish first on his version, how many times he was visited by Mongezi. The reason for the details, it refers according to Mr Berger, to the statements and my clients have been reflect it in the statements, that is why I am asking this.

CHAIRPERSON: Can you recall how many times Mr Mongezi visited you?

MR NOSENGA: I said I think he came twice to visit me, but then Mr Berger said he came more than twice.

MR MEY: The only reason why you say that he came more than twice, was because you were led by Mr Berger on that fact, is that correct?

CHAIRPERSON: If I understand his answer it is that as far as he can recall, he came twice, but he cannot dispute the fact that it was four times.

MR MEY: Mr Nosenga, I want to refer you to Exhibit R, page 3, paragraph 9(a)(iv), the last part thereof. It was covered by Mr Berger that the "incidents attached herewith, details of other incidents attached herewith" refers to the statement that was taken from you. When you were cross-examined by Mr Lowies, you specifically said it refers to the incidents at Sebokeng and Small Farms?

MR NOSENGA: I said I am here for the Sebokeng as well as the Boipatong incidents.

MR MEY: I understand that, but the reason why I am asking this is why did you at first say that it is only referring to the Sebokeng, Everton and Small Farms incidents, which was on the same day, the 15th of June 1992?

MR NOSENGA: I also spoke about the Boipatong incident.

CHAIRPERSON: What you are being asked Mr Nosenga is, reference is made in your application to the details of other incidents and when you testified earlier on you said the other incidents referred to in your application, were the ones in Everton and Small Farms. Do you understand that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I understand that.

CHAIRPERSON: Today, when you were being questioned by Mr Berger you said the other incidents referred to in your application, are the ones set out in the unsigned affidavit, which included Boipatong, do you understand that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I understand that.

CHAIRPERSON: These are two different things. The first one does not refer to Boipatong, whereas the second one you referred to Boipatong, do you understand that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I understand that.

CHAIRPERSON: What he wants to know then is why did you tell us that it only refers to Everton and Small Farms if in fact it included Boipatong as well?

MR NOSENGA: I did say that this pertains to Sebokeng as well as Small Farms and the Boipatong incident. They are saying this one particular statement refers to Sebokeng and the other one to Boipatong, really I don't know.

MR MEY: Mr Nosenga, I want to put it to you the reason why there are so many discrepancies in your evidence, it was put to you previously as well, that you were not there and you didn't partake in the Boipatong massacre.

MR NOSENGA: No, I was part of that attack, I was present.

MR MEY: I want to put it to you that you are also implicating the Police and specifically Chaka and Rooikop falsely?

MR NOSENGA: No, I am not falsely implicating people. Why do I choose to implicate Peens and Chaka when there are so many Police in South Africa? I cannot just implicate people who were not involved. I am saying this because they were present, this is not hearsay, I was present.

MR MEY: Who fetched you from Parys when you were brought to Vereeniging?

MR NOSENGA: I said if I still remember very well, the person who brought me was Chaka. He brought me to Vereeniging.

MR MEY: Was he the Investigating Officer?

MR NOSENGA: No. There were people who were investigating this case. Sixteen is the one who was investigating the motor vehicle offence and these others were investigating ...

CHAIRPERSON: The name of the Police Officer is Sixteen?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, Sixteen is the one who brought or should I say, came to investigate me on the question of the stolen vehicle, or the alleged stolen vehicle, my apology.

MR MEY: Was Chaka involved in that investigation?

MR NOSENGA: No, Chaka came to fetch me and he brought me here in Vereeniging.

MR MEY: At that stage he was at the Murder and Robbery Squad, according to you, is that correct?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, in Flora Gardens in Vanderbijlpark.

MR MEY: On your way from Parys to Vereeniging, did Chaka discuss anything with you?

MR NOSENGA: No, I do not recall.

MR MEY: Was he the only one who fetched you from Parys?

MR NOSENGA: I still remember Chaka, I cannot recall other black Policemen.

MR MEY: Were they more than one Police Officers who fetched you?

MR NOSENGA: There were three of them, I don't know the other two. They were using a private vehicle.

MR MEY: He didn't say anything about the Boipatong massacre on the way from Parys to Vereeniging?

MR NOSENGA: No, he did not make mention of Boipatong. He only spoke about the Vereeniging incident. Peens and others only came to me when I was, once I was here in Vereeniging.

MR MEY: I want to put it to you that Rooikop, alias Mr Greeff or Mr Greeff alias Rooikop, was not involved in any way with the Boipatong massacre?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't know about that, he was involved. He was involved, Rooikop was involved. I cannot just implicate him if he was not involved.

MR MEY: Chaka was not involved in any way with the Boipatong massacre?

MR NOSENGA: No, I don't know anything about that. Chaka is involved. Why did I just choose to implicate Chaka and not others? Why am I not implicating other Policemen?

MR MEY: I also want to put it to you that Chaka was not a member of the Murder and Robbery Squad.

MR NOSENGA: I do not know about that, but I used to see him at Flora Gardens with the other Police Officers who worked there.

MR MEY: When was that?

MR NOSENGA: When I was arrested with regards the vehicle. I knew him to be working there at Flora Gardens, other people were also arrested and he was involved in their arrest.

MR MEY: During May/June 1992 Chaka was a member of the Green Beans as you called it, the Municipal Police.

MR NOSENGA: I do not know anything about that. I knew him to be a member of the Murder and Robbery Unit.

MR MEY: Thank you Mr Chairperson, I've got no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MEY: CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Mr Mapoma?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR MAPOMA: Thank you Chair. Mr Nosenga, you will recall that during your cross-examination you said that you were staying in Everton prior to you joining kwaMadala hostel.

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did reside in Everton.

MR MAPOMA: And that you were staying with your uncle there?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I grew up in my uncle's house.

MR MAPOMA: What is the name of the uncle, who is the uncle?

MR NOSENGA: His name is Mude Nosenga.

MR MAPOMA: The first name again?

MR NOSENGA: Nosenga, Mude.

MR MAPOMA: Is the house you were staying in, his house?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR MAPOMA: When you left Everton, did you keep contact with him while you were staying in the kwaMadala residence, hostel?

MR NOSENGA: No, I could not, I was not able to go to Everton at that time, I only started communicating with him when I was in prison.

MR MAPOMA: Were you ever visited by any of your family members when you were staying in kwaMadala hostel?

MR NOSENGA: No, no sir, they were frightened. They would not have come to see me at the hostel because it was only IFP members who resided there.

MR MAPOMA: You will remember when you gave evidence, you said your sister confronted you after the massacre about your participation in the massacre, which killed some of your relatives? How did you communicate with her?

MR NOSENGA: She told me this when I was in prison.

MR MAPOMA: When was that?

MR NOSENGA: I do not recall. I think she even visited me last month.

MR MAPOMA: Is she staying with your uncle?

MR NOSENGA: No, she is married and resides in Bekkersdal.

MR MAPOMA: What are her names, her full names?

MR NOSENGA: Nomvula Nosenga.

MR MAPOMA: Now that she is married, what is her surname, married surname?

MR NOSENGA: Her husband is Zakhile Latha.

MR MAPOMA: I would like you to clarify your arrest now in connection with the Sebokeng attacks. Where exactly were you arrested?

MR NOSENGA: I was arrested in Parys and I was transferred to Vereeniging, but I was arrested in Parys.

MR MAPOMA: Is that the arrest which was conducted by Chaka?

MR NOSENGA: Chaka collected me from Parys to Vereeniging.

MR MAPOMA: And when you were arrested in Parys, were you arrested in connection with the motor vehicle or in connection with the Sebokeng attacks?

MR NOSENGA: I was arrested in connection with the vehicle.

MR MAPOMA: And is it out of that arrest that you happened now to be interrogated in connection with the drive-by shootings in Sebokeng and other incidents?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is what I said. Because it was just after the Sebokeng incident.

MR MAPOMA: Now, when they came, when Peens and Chaka came to you in Vereeniging, can you recall how long after you were arrested, did they came to you now to threaten you about Boipatong?

MR NOSENGA: No, I cannot recall properly. I cannot recall that time.

MR MAPOMA: Are you able to say that at that time that Peens and Chaka visited you and allegedly threatened you, if you implicate them in connection with the Boipatong massacre, are you able to say as to whether at that time, you had already made a statement implicating Victor Keswa amongst others?

MR NOSENGA: I made the statement when I was being tortured by the Police.

MR MAPOMA: When you made the statement as a result of torture by the Police, did you implicate Victor Keswa amongst others as your co-perpetrators for the Sebokeng attack?

MR NOSENGA: No sir. I only mentioned Papie and Mzwake, that is when I was tortured. I implicated those two persons because I had suffered severe torture.

MR MAPOMA: Did you implicate Victor Keswa at all in connection with the Sebokeng attack?

MR NOSENGA: No, I only mentioned Victor Keswa recently when I applied for amnesty.

MR MAPOMA: Did you mention him in court?

MR NOSENGA: No, the only people that I mentioned were Papie and Mzwake, but they were acquitted and I remained in prison.

MR MAPOMA: Now when Victor Keswa died, where were you?

MR NOSENGA: I had already been incarcerated.

MR MAPOMA: Thank you Chairperson, no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MAPOMA

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Tanzer, any re-examination?

RE-EXAMINATION BY MS TANZER: Just one question. When you decided to apply for amnesty for crimes that you committed, did you intend to apply for amnesty for both the Sebokeng matter and the Boipatong attack?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MS TANZER: I think the rest of the question we dealt with in great detail and no more questions, thank you.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS TANZER

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, indeed, yes. Mr Sibanyoni, do you have any questions?

MR SIBANYONI: Thank you Mr Chairperson. Mr Nosenga, if your uncle's surname is Nosenga, what is your father's surname?

MR NOSENGA: My father's surname is Ngoni. Nosenga is my mother's surname, but my father's surname is Ngoni.

MR SIBANYONI: And who is your mother's name?

MR NOSENGA: My mother passed away when I was very little, but I can get the name, maybe at home.

MR SIBANYONI: As an IFP member, why did you prefer to contact the ANC when you wanted to apply for amnesty?

MR NOSENGA: I could not have contacted the IFP, because I was going to tell the truth as I know it, and it was contradictory to what the IFP said.

MR SIBANYONI: What did the IFP say?

MR NOSENGA: If I remember correctly, the IFP - members of the IFP did not implicate leaders in such incidents, that is why I thought the ANC would be in a position to help me to apply for amnesty.

MR SIBANYONI: How did you know that the IFP did not implicate its leaders in the incidents?

MR NOSENGA: I have been listening to the media and TV, the radio, and the IFP leaders deny any knowledge of their members, an example will be Ndlandla, Buthelezi denied that he knew him. That is why I felt that I would be put at a disadvantage, the IFP did not even come to visit me in prison.

MR SIBANYONI: Before you even decided to apply for amnesty, are you saying you knew that the IFP was for example disassociating itself with the Boipatong incident?

MR NOSENGA: That is true sir. Yes, they were denying that Themba Khosa was present when the meeting was held in the hostel. Even now, they have not come to me, it is only my family who comes to visit me, whereas it is not them who had instructed me to go on that killing spree.

CHAIRPERSON: Prior to making the application, did you know that the IFP disassociated itself from the Boipatong massacre?

MR NOSENGA: Yes sir, I did know. I know that they deny involvement as they are doing now, people like Themba Khosa deny that they were involved, but they supported the people when they held those meetings when they went to kill people. As I said before, I listened to the radio, watched TV, the news, and the leaders were denying any involvement. It is difficult for them to admit that they were involved.

MR SIBANYONI: Thank you Mr Chairperson. I have finished, thank you Mr Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

ADV SIGODI: Just one question, you mentioned that when you left the hostel, you had to wear headbands in order to identify yourselves. Some of the applicants mentioned that they were wearing white headbands, do you know anything about that?

MR NOSENGA: No, we were wearing red headbands, I do not know anything about white headbands. I only knew the red headbands that we were wearing.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Lax?

MR LAX: Just one little aspect Mr Chairperson. If I remember your evidence correctly, you said under-examination, you said you had Mr Peens in your sight at all times. Did I hear that correctly?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is correct.

MR LAX: How could you have had him in your sight when you were inside these houses?

MR NOSENGA: After we had shot people in the house, on our way out, I would see him in the street or getting into the casspir.

MR LAX: Yes, the simple question is that if you were in the house, you couldn't have seen what was going on outside the house?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is true, I would see him as I got out of the house. I would not be able to see if I was inside. I only saw him as I went out of the house.

MR LAX: The last question I have is this, you have now been asked about many statements, at least two statements before us and at least an application form. Unless you are reminded, you have very little independent recollection of these documents, is that right?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

MR LAX: How were you able then to tell us what happened in relation to which document and who asked what questions and who did what and who corrected you on this or that? How were you able to remember that detail and yet, you can't even remember these documents?

MR NOSENGA: As I said before, most people who did the interpreting for me, were not fluent in Zulu, that is why I had to intervene now and then.

MR LAX: Yes, but I want you to tell me honestly now, you don't remember these statements, how therefore do you remember what happened when each one was taken separately?

MR NOSENGA: I did say that I do not remember other statements, but I could remember some statements or the contents of some statements which is why I was able to say I corrected so and so here and there.

MR LAX: Thank you Chairperson, no further questions.

CHAIRPERSON: You have just told my colleague that the people who interpreted for you, could not speak fluent Zulu, is that right?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, that is what I said.

CHAIRPERSON: Did most of these people, am I correct in saying that most of these people spoke Sotho?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: And were you provided with the Interpreter at your own request or did they just give you the Interpreter?

MR NOSENGA: They were just calling a Policeman to interpret for me.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you make it clear to them look here, I don't understand Sotho, I can't speak Sotho, I only speak Zulu, did you tell them that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I did tell them and they also knew that I speak Zulu, not Sotho.

CHAIRPERSON: But at that stage, were you ever provided with an Interpreter who was fluent in Zulu?

MR NOSENGA: No sir, they only provided me with those who did not speak fluent Zulu.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Do you know whether there were people who could speak fluent Zulu who could have interpreted for you?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, an example as I said, there were people who could speak Zulu.

CHAIRPERSON: But nevertheless they were not made available to you?

MR NOSENGA: No, they only gave me a person who spoke Sotho.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. We were told by some of the applicants that shortly after your arrival at the hostel, you used to mix with a small group of young men who spoke Sotho, what do you say to that?

MR NOSENGA: I do not know anything about that.

CHAIRPERSON: You were born and brought up in Sebokeng, were you?

MR NOSENGA: I was born in Everton.

CHAIRPERSON: In Everton, yes, very well. What is the township there, is there a township there?

MR NOSENGA: It is a shack area.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that where you were born and brought up?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: And did you go to school in and around Everton?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: What is the main language that is spoken there?

MR NOSENGA: It is predominantly Sotho but there are also Zulus and Xhosas.

CHAIRPERSON: But you were not Sothos?

MR NOSENGA: No.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well, you have told us that, I think you were asked whether all the people who came to visit you whilst you were in prison, whether they came on their own without you having requested to see them, and your answer was yes. Do you recall that answer?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Today you have given us somewhat detailed telephone calls that you made to various people, requesting them to come and speak to you often concerning the Boipatong and the Sebokeng massacre. Do you recall that?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: And I think on your own, without anyone even asking you about this, you mentioned the name of Patience as being one of the persons that you spoke to on one of these telephone conversations?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Now which is which now?

MR NOSENGA: The truth is that I did phone Patience.

CHAIRPERSON: Why then did you tell us that the people who came to you, came of their own accord without you having requested them to come and see you? Why did you tell us that?

MR NOSENGA: (No translation)

CHAIRPERSON: I beg your pardon?

MR NOSENGA: The ANC was being mentioned in this hearing and I only remembered when Mr Berger reminded me.

CHAIRPERSON: It is not correct that people came to see you of their own accord, you requested them, that is what you have told us? I want to find out from you why did you tell us that they came to you of their own accord when in fact you know that it wasn't correct?

MR NOSENGA: Since last week, the ANC has been prominent in this hearing and I was intimidated to speak about those calls.

CHAIRPERSON: Were you what? Yes. You were afraid because you heard the name of the ANC being mentioned?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: What were you afraid of?

MR NOSENGA: The ANC was being mentioned.

CHAIRPERSON: What were you afraid when the name of the ANC was being mentioned?

MR NOSENGA: It was be cause it was alleged that the ANC had planted me or had prompted me to apply for amnesty.

CHAIRPERSON: I do not understand what you are saying.

MR NOSENGA: The ANC's name was mentioned, therefore I was afraid to admit that Patience was called by me.

CHAIRPERSON: You did not want to disclose the fact that some people from the ANC came to see you, is that what you are saying? But if Mr Mongezi was an Attorney, that you have told us he was, why were you afraid to mention that he came to see you after you had requested him to come and see you?

MR NOSENGA: I was assisted by my inmates.

CHAIRPERSON: So you yourself did not telephone Mr Mongezi, is that what you are saying now?

MR NOSENGA: I did telephone Mongezi. That is the - one inmate got in contact with Mongezi.

CHAIRPERSON: So the first person who got in touch with Mongezi, is a fellow prison inmate?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, the inmates I was with at Leeukop.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, and then subsequent to that, you then spoke to Mr Mongezi?

MR NOSENGA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Now what I want to find out is we know that it was one of your fellow prisoners who got in touch with them, why didn't you tell us that a fellow prisoner telephoned Mr Mongezi and as a result of that, I then also spoke to him? Why didn't you tell us about that?

MR NOSENGA: Many people, several people came to me and I therefore do not remember them all. As Mr Berger was reminding me, he helped me to remember.

CHAIRPERSON: If you had not been reminded that you made those calls, you would not have told us that?

MR NOSENGA: No, I would have not remembered because Mr Berger helped me.

CHAIRPERSON: So it was just because Mr Berger reminded you that you made these phone calls that it then clicked in your mind, yes, indeed, I did make these calls?

MR NOSENGA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: It is not a question of you being afraid?

MR NOSENGA: I said I was afraid with regards to the ANC being mentioned, it was now alleged that the ANC was now encouraging me or had planted me in these hearings.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you.

MR LAX: Can I just check this last thing with you Mr Nosenga, it is just arising out of the last set of questions and is it so therefore that because you were afraid, you wouldn't have mentioned anything about your calls to the ANC?

MR NOSENGA: I had forgotten about that, but I did contact the ANC.

MR LAX: If you had forgotten about it, what was there to be afraid of?

MR NOSENGA: It was the mentioning of the ANC that they were the people who had encouraged me or who had planted me in these hearings.

MR LAX: Yes, you are missing the point I am trying to put to you. If you had forgotten about these calls, you wouldn't have remembered that you had made them and you wouldn't have therefore had a thought in your head, that there was anything to be afraid about mentioning them?

MR NOSENGA: Yes, I had forgotten about it, and Mr Berger reminded me about it.

MR LAX: No, I will leave it Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Nosenga, we understand it has been a very long day for you, you have been on the stand for this, the sixth day. Thank you, you may return to your seat.

WITNESS EXCUSED

CHAIRPERSON: Is the position that we are now crossing to the victims? Are you calling any more witnesses? You don't have anyone else to call?

MS TANZER: No, that is my witness.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, all right.

MR BERGER: No Chairperson, that is not the position, I understood that my learned friend, Mr Strydom, was going to call a witness to prove the minutes of the meeting in Ulundi.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that witness available now?

MR STRYDOM: Chairperson, I have in my possession an affidavit from a person by the surname Duma.

CHAIRPERSON: Who is that?

MR STRYDOM: Duma.

CHAIRPERSON: Right, what are the full names?

MR STRYDOM: The full names are Thamsanqa Oswald Duma, with reference to the Ulundi conference, and I would beg leave to hand in this affidavit. The next Exhibit number would be AA, if Chairperson is going to accept this. Chairperson, as indicated only during the course of these hearings, at this stage we do not intend calling any witnesses, but if there is something to rebut, that comes out of the evidence of the victims ...

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, (indistinct) but at the moment, is that the applicant's case?

MR STRYDOM: That is the applicant's case.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well. Okay, we will address your application tomorrow morning, I see you have given us short Heads. Yes, very well, okay. Yes Mr Berger?

MR BERGER: I am sorry Chairperson, I missed the question.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, this is the applicant's case.

MR BERGER: Chairperson, I also understood that Mr Peens, Mr Chaka and Rooikop had been subpoenaed to give evidence, are they not going to be giving evidence before the victims give their evidence?

CHAIRPERSON: No.

MR BERGER: Well, then the victims will start leading evidence as soon as Mr Lowies has finished his application.

CHAIRPERSON: Tomorrow morning at nine o'clock. We will adjourn until tomorrow morning.

MR STRYDOM: Chairperson, can I just add something, there is a possibility of one other witness. I have to take instructions, it is a very short witness, if we are going to call him, we will have him ready tomorrow, it is in connection with this Ulundi hearings.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that going to be Mr Duma?

MR STRYDOM: No, it is another witness, I have just been instructed, I think his surname is Twala.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, very well. Okay.

MR DU PLESSIS: Chair, with your permission may I enquire which ...

CHAIRPERSON: This affidavit doesn't say anything about the minutes.

MR STRYDOM: It doesn't state anything about the minutes, it is just stated that it is an open conference for anybody to attend and that is the purpose of this affidavit.

CHAIRPERSON: It says

"... I cannot recall any participation by Andries Nosenga ..."

MR STRYDOM: Yes, that is what this person said.

CHAIRPERSON: What is the value of this affidavit?

MR STRYDOM: The reason why this affidavit was handed up is to show that it is open to any person, I will argue later on the basis that if any person of the public can attend this hearing, one would not have expected congratulations about an incident that took, an incident like Boipatong, that took place. That is the value of this.

CHAIRPERSON: We have heard from the people who were there, I think what we were eagerly waiting for, are the minutes and someone to you know, to prove the minutes. Because you will understand that once they were handed in, but there has been an objection, it is a document so far, which purports to be the minutes, so once there is an issue, then it is incumbent upon the applicant to prove those minutes, you do understand that? Mr Berger, that is the position of the victims, is that right?

MR BERGER: that is correct Chairperson, and also as far as this affidavit is concerned, if it is intended to prove the truth of the contents, we object to that as well.

MR STRYDOM: I take the point, we will see what we can do.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR STRYDOM: We will inform you tomorrow.

CHAIRPERSON: Tomorrow morning at nine o'clock, we will start with the application. Mr Mapoma, have you received the copy of the short Heads?

MR MAPOMA: Yes, Mr Chairman, I have received the copy.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Berger, has your team received this?

MR BERGER: We have Chairperson, yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Very well, all right, tomorrow morning nine o'clock, thank you.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

 
SABC Logo
Broadcasting for Total Citizen Empowerment
DMMA Logo
SABC © 2020
>