|News | Sport | TV | Radio | Education | TV Licenses | Contact Us|
TRC Final Report
Page Number (Original) 375
Paragraph Numbers 1 to 9
Volume SIX Section THREE Chapter FOUR
The Pan Africanist Congress
SUMMARY AND ANALYSIS OF AMNESTY APPLICATIONS
1. The Amnesty Committee received amnesty applications from 134 supporters and members of the Pan Africanist Congress (PAC) and/or African People’s Liberation Army (APLA). Six of the applicants claimed to be members of the Pan Africanist Student Organisation (PASO).
2. PAC/ APLA members applied for amnesty for a range of offences. These included violations arising from attacks on the security forces, attacks on white farmers and civilians and armed robberies and sabotage operations. Individuals generally applied for amnesty for several acts. These included the execution of the operation; the possession of arms, ammunition and/or explosives; casualties and injuries arising out of the operation, and violations committed while retreating from the operation (for example during a shoot-out with the police).
3. In all, 138 individual applicants applied for 204 violations. All the applicants were male. Most were aged between 17 and 35 years of age. The youngest applicant was 14 years old at the time of the violation.
4. The Amnesty Committee granted amnesty for 155 out of 204 acts (76%) committed in the course of eighty separate incidents. It refused amnesty for forty-nine acts (24%) committed in the course of thirty-three separate incidents.199
5. A total of 109 people were killed and 140 people survived attempted killings, many with severe injuries.
6. The violations for which amnesty was sought occurred in all four of the former provinces.200 However, the PAC operation was more concentrated in the Western Cape and in areas within striking distance of the Transkei, where its operational platform was based during the early 1990s.
7. The majority of the amnesty applications related to violations committed between February 1990 and April 1994 and were submitted by members of APLA. Amnesty applications for violations committed in the earlier period were for offences that were not strictly defined as gross violations of human rights. These included activities such as furthering the aims and membership of a banned organisation, the possession of arms and ammunition and harbouring guerrillas in order to further the armed struggle. For the most part, these applications w e re dealt with in chambers201 and were granted by the Amnesty Committee.
This chapter will deal mainly with applications in the following categories:
a Violations committed by the PAC within its own ranks;
b Armed robberies;
c Attacks on security forces ;
d Armed ambushes;
e Attacks on civilians;
f Attacks on farms;
h Procurement and possession of arms, explosives and munitions, and
i Other matters.
9. It should be noted, however, that these are not discrete categories. In some instances, for example, APLA attacks on security forces were motivated by the intention to strip the victims of their firearms and could therefore also be described as armed robberies. Many attacks on farmers and farms were also intended as armed robberies.199 As early as 1996, the Amnesty Committee decided to deal with incidents rather than individual acts in order to make it possible to deal with groups of applicants who had been involved in the same incident but who may have committed a number of different acts. Thus, when dealing with applications, the Committee decided to focus on specific incidents, each comprising a number of different acts/offences. 200 Transvaal , C a p e, Orange Free State and Natal. 201 See this volume, Section One, Chapter Three for more information about chamber matters.
Statistics: Amnesties granted and refused