MR KOOPEDI: Chairperson, I believe the last matter that we have dealt with concludes what would have been my roll. In the matter that is being mentioned, there's no better way of putting it, other than saying I was fired from this matter Chairperson, that I cannot handle this matter, so the applicant will proceed on his own, Chairperson and may I be excused Chairperson?
CHAIRPERSON: Alright. Wait till the applicant has said what he wants to say. You may wish to reply. You can be excused after that. Who is the applicant? Are both applicants here?
MR KOOPEDI: Yes, both of them are here. I had not consulted with Mr Ramphomane ...(indistinct - mike not on)
CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, I can't hear you.
MR KOOPEDI: I'm saying both applicants are here, Chairperson.
CHAIRPERSON: Right. Mr Twala.
MR TWALA: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: And Mr Ramphomane?
MR RAMPHOMANE: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Right, what do you wish to proceeding with?
MR TWALA: Very briefly I thought, having sat through ...(indistinct) - I've sat through the past week listening to the various presentations that were done by some of the members of the ANC who were part of the Security Services or Intelligence and Security. I personally ended up having a view which we therefore clashed with my counsel and I therefore preferred that maybe he should step down and the matter would be - we can resolve it perhaps at some other stage, or if need be I would get other counsel.
My view was that when I applied for the amnesty, I did so with the full conviction that I supported the process. I still do, but what had struck me, is what appeared to me as some form of inconsistency that made me very concerned. With due respect, I perhaps would refer to yourselves, Chair and Judge de Jager. I have not see this being demonstrated equally by Mr Sibanyoni. I am not being discriminatory here, but I'm simply stating what I observed.
Towards that end, perhaps I should start with what I've seen occurring just in the last sitting. We had - the former chap here was an askari, who I believed left the ANC because, by his own admission, he didn't necessarily participate in the physical beating, but maybe violated rights of individuals concerned when he actually subdued them forcefully and kept them down, for other persons to beat them up. And then towards that end, I did not find a particularly interesting reaction on the part of both, or the entire Panel, to the fact - to actually question this man, to say even though maybe it is true that you may not have beaten these people, but if you say you are opposed to violence in the manner that you did, how come therefore you leave the ANC, for argument sake, Lucifer, you know, refusing to accept instructions from Lucifer who I presume is an angel to the Devil, and actually opt to take instructions directly from the Devil himself.
I thought it was a contradiction which the Panel to chose to keep quiet about it and not question it, but on the other hand earlier on, what I observed was the fact that when two of the other applicants made representations, they made mention of one of their unit Commanders or whatever as Tim Williams, there seemed to have been a particularly interesting reaction on the part of the Panel, to actually say: "Yes, yes, we hear that but what exactly did Tim Williams do?" even though the applicant may have said it. Perhaps it is an over-reaction on my part, but if it be so, it's a very sad over-reaction, but I then felt, if I were to come up and sit here and present what may have occurred and thank God I do not have any of the high flyers who's integrity may possibly in my view be ...(indistinct) by the reaction on the part of the Panel, I then felt that perhaps if I come in, the nonentity that I am, perhaps it may be best that I should actually ask that I take, I relate my story to a different Panel altogether. I'm saying this not because I have a particular agenda or something against your Lordships there, but simply because it is my concerns which I felt, maybe my concerns would be better addressed in some other way.
My colleague here, I spoke to him telephonically and raised some of the concerns that I see. We did not finally resolve the matter, so that even now I thought that we would be able to resolve the matter firmly and we have not been - we did not have sufficient time because I was worried that we may be called in and be found to be outside. So because of that I really would request that my - I would request that my plea be considered. Thank you. Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Ramphomane, do you wish to say anything?
MR RAMPHOMANE: I'm going to use the vernacular.
It is true that Mr Twala contacted me telephonically. He told me exactly what he said before this Committee, before this Panel.
INTERPRETER: Sorry, Chairperson, can the speaker change to channel 3 because he's listening to English. Thank you.
MR RAMPHOMANE: We agreed with Mr Twala on the phone that if there are problems which he has raised before this Committee, therefore we should meet and consult legal counsel and request him as to whether should we continue or not. The agreement was that we'd only continue if the present Committee recuse itself, so that tomorrow we'd not be complaining about being cheated - we are not in Court, but we are before this Committee to ask for amnesty. That is my request.
CHAIRPERSON: Any comments?
MR MAPOMA: Chairperson, in the light of these perceptions which seem to be expressed by the applicants, I propose that this matter be postponed to the next - for the 3rd of August, that is Thursday, as well.
CHAIRPERSON: I'm afraid we can't put, what appears now to be an opposed matter down, the 3rd of August he is squeezing in one matter, you will have to arrange a proper date with somebody if you wish to ask for an adjournment to a date on this basis. I don't think that we can - we've already put one extra matter onto Judge Potgieter's roll on the basis that we anticipated it will be a withdrawal. We can't now - there's no suggestion that these two applicants wish to withdraw, rather the contrary, isn't that so?
MR MAPOMA: That is so, Chairperson, but it is not like that this matter is being opposed as such, we do not have the victim in this matter, Mr Monde Chief Mpateni. In fact he died, this victim and we have not been able to locate his next of kin up to this point. I am, Chairperson, just weary of a situation where the Committee would be drawn into unnecessary controversy, Chairperson with respect, because whatever the decision may be, would not impact a good image to the Committee, Chairperson, with respect. I do not at any given moment suggest that I subscribe to the perceptions which have been expressed by the applicant in this matter, but Chairperson, with a view to avoid unnecessary controversies, that's why I suggest that this matter be ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: I suggest you go and ascertain a date.
MR MAPOMA: I can as well do that Chairperson, with pleasure.
JUDGE DE JAGER: Could I say, I wouldn't like to sit, if you haven't got trust that I will deal with the matter according to my integrity and according to what I really think on the evidence. I wouldn't like to sit. I want you to be heard by a Panel you put your trust in. As far as myself is concerned, I can assure you I'll deal with the evidence before me like I've done in all the other matters, even matters that have been very, very controversial and I've come to a conclusion that I have, whatever the consequences may be, so as far as I'm concerned, I'm happy that I would deal according to my conscience with the matter, but I appreciate your openness and I'll rather not sit on a Committee hearing your matter, because I can see you've got certain ideas about me and I wouldn't like to come to any conclusion, whether it's granting or refusing amnesty to you, if you're not putting your trust in me as a Committee member.
CHAIRPERSON: I agree entirely with my colleague Mr de Jager. I have sat on Amnesty Committees for several years now and it's the first time it has been mentioned, but if you are unhappy, I do not want to hear your application.
MR KOOPEDI: Am I excused, Chairperson?
CHAIRPERSON: You are excused.
MR KOOPEDI: Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: Are the two gentlemen still in...(indistinct)? The matter is being adjourned till Thursday the 27th of July at the JISS Centre in Johannesburg at 9 o'clock in the morning. I understand you have told our Evidence Leader that you'll be making arrangements for your own legal representation and so you'll arrange with him and you and he will be present on Thursday morning, this Thursday, does that suite you both? We place on record that the two applicants have said that they appreciate what has been done and that they will make the necessary arrangements. Thank you. That concludes the matters that were set down for hearing, not the hearings here. Thank you.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
