CHAIRPERSON: Good afternoon. The Panel is the same as we were constituted this morning. I'm going to ask the legal representatives to announce themselves for the purpose of the record.
MS LOONAT: Good afternoon. My name is Zarina Loonat ...(indistinct). I'm representing the applicant in this matter today, Mr Musa Mahambane. Thank you.
MS DE KLERK: Good afternoon Members of the Panel. I'm Marcia de Klerk. I'm representing the victim, Mrs Walters, Martin Craven, Mrs ...(indistinct), Mrs ...(indistinct) and Mrs Smith. Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: Is it Ms de Klerk?
MS DE KLERK: That's correct.
CHAIRPERSON: Could you just go by those names of the people, of the victims again please?
MS DE KLERK: Mrs Walters who's the next of kin of Derek Walters who is ...
CHAIRPERSON: Deceased?
MS DE KLERK: That's correct.
CHAIRPERSON: And who else?
MS DE KLERK: Mr Craven, Martin Craven. Then Mr de Grubb. However Miss de Grubb hasn't been included in the indictment, you know, for the trial. He hasn't suffered any injuries.
CHAIRPERSON: But is he willing to participate in the process because he can still be regarded as a victim?
MS DE KLERK: Well Mr de Grubb, I have got his instructions to oppose the application for amnesty.
CHAIRPERSON: Then?
MS DE KLERK: Then there's Mrs Barkor who is present. Mr Barkor is the wife of Vic Barkor who was shot in the eye outside the NBS, who has subsequently a few months later died.
CHAIRPERSON: As a result of his injury?
MS DE KLERK: Well, that hasn't been ascertained as a definite conclusion. Mr Barkor died of a brain haemorrhage which could have been as a result of the injuries sustained. Then there's Mrs Catherine Druft. Mrs Druft has also indicated to me, well given me her instructions to oppose the application. However, she's unavailable to attend the hearing today on the basis that she underwent an operation on Friday and she's still hospitalised. And then there's Mrs Gloria Smith. She said that she's not interested in attending the hearing or anything, but she does oppose the application.
CHAIRPERSON: Does not, or does?
MS DE KLERK: She opposes the application for amnesty. However, she's not interested in attending the hearing as such.
CHAIRPERSON: Now before we carry on, I see you have possibly 6 people who could be regarded as victims, all of whom are opposing the application. On what basis would they be opposing the application given the requirements of the Act?
MS DE KLERK: The basis of the opposition is the fact that they don't feel that the robbery as such, or the murder of Mr Walters, was politically motivated. They can't see the political object which the applicant was striving to achieve. It seems to be common amongst all the victims that this was just a blatant robbery, an attempted hijacking, whereby an innocent person, because he couldn't get loose of a seat belt, was murdered.
In terms of ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Who was that, Mr Walters?
MS DE KLERK: Mr Walters. In light of that, that the applicant doesn't fulfil the requirements in order for him to succeed in the application for amnesty.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Ms de Klerk in the meantime I think it'd be wise for you to get some information where applicable, where people have died, whether there are any children left as well, because they would, in the event of us granting in this case amnesty, they in addition to the surviving spouse, would be regarded as victims.
Yes, Ms Loonat. Does your client speak Zulu?
MS LOONAT: Yes, Mr Chairman.
MUSA MAHAMBANE: (sworn states)
EXAMINATION BY MS LOONAT: Mr Mahambane, you were born on the 29th of March 1966 in Newlands in Durban, you are a South African citizen, is that correct?
MR MAHAMBANE: That's correct.
MS LOONAT: You are now 34 years old and you have spent, according to the record, 7 years in prison of your 20 year sentence, is that correct?
MR MAHAMBANE: That's correct.
MS LOONAT: The sentence was imposed on you on the 23rd of May 1993, for committing the following offences on the 26th of October 1991, at the NBS, the Natal Building Society, in Umhlanga, namely robbery, attempted murder of Mr Barkor, Messrs Barkor, Reed and Craven and the unlawful possession of firearms and ammunition, is that correct?
MR MAHAMBANE: That's correct.
CHAIRPERSON: In respect of who are the attempted murder application made?
MS LOONAT: Mr Barkor, Mr Reed and Mr Craven. Your Honour, this is on page 64 of the bundle, line 20.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Barkor, Mr ?
MS LOONAT: Reed and Mr Craven and I get that from the bundle on page 64.
CHAIRPERSON: And the murder of?
MS LOONAT: The murder of Mr Walters.
CHAIRPERSON: Ja and?
MS LOONAT: The unlawful possession of firearms and ammunition.
CHAIRPERSON: Anything else?
MS LOONAT: May I proceed Your Honour? Thank you. Sir, are you married?
MR MAHAMBANE: No.
MS LOONAT: Do you have any children?
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes, I have two children.
MS LOONAT: Where do you live? Where do your children live?
MR MAHAMBANE: They live with my mother.
MS LOONAT: So were you employed prior to this offence?
MR MAHAMBANE: I used to be a taxi driver.
MS LOONAT: Do you have any previous convictions?
MR MAHAMBANE: No.
MS LOONAT: What political party do you belong to?
MR MAHAMBANE: The ANC.
MS LOONAT: Are you a registered member of the ANC?
MR MAHAMBANE: I am not a card carrying member.
MS LOONAT: Why didn't you get ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: At the time, were you?
MR MAHAMBANE: No, at that time it was not very important to have a card
MS LOONAT: How long were you a supporter of the ANC?
MR MAHAMBANE: I started supporting the ANC in 1985 after Mrs ...(indistinct) death.
MS LOONAT: Before we proceed, could you please tell the Panel what your level of education was at the time?
MR MAHAMBANE: Up to standard 9.
MS LOONAT: So it was after standard 9 that you got involved in politics, is that correct?
MR MAHAMBANE: I was saying so, but we also used to have political meeting at school.
MS LOONAT: Do you own a firearm?
MR MAHAMBANE: No.
MS LOONAT: Are you trained to use one?
MR MAHAMBANE: We received very basic training on how to use a firearm.
CHAIRPERSON: Where?
MR MAHAMBANE: In the township.
CHAIRPERSON: By whom?
MR MAHAMBANE: By Mandla.
CHAIRPERSON: Who's Mandla?
MR MAHAMBANE: Mandla Mlambo was our leader.
CHAIRPERSON: What kind of leader?
MR MAHAMBANE: He is the person who used to issue out instructions when we held meetings.
CHAIRPERSON: For what?
MR MAHAMBANE: At the time, we were under constant attack from Lindelane residents and the police, so we were involved in defending our community.
CHAIRPERSON: What type of instructions did he give?
MR MAHAMBANE: As to strategising as to how to best defend ourselves against these attacks.
CHAIRPERSON: And he taught you how to use a firearm?
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes, he was the person who demonstrated to us.
CHAIRPERSON: How many lessons did you have?
MR MAHAMBANE: It was not very thorough, but he just showed us the firearm and ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: How many lessons did you have?
MR MAHAMBANE: I will say two occasions.
CHAIRPERSON: Two occasions. In kwaMashu?
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: How many students were there when you were trained on these two occasions?
MR MAHAMBANE: We were not more than 10.
CHAIRPERSON: So he would do at least, or most, 10 at a time?
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes, we'd never be more than 10.
CHAIRPERSON: What kind of gun or firearm were you trained in?
MR MAHAMBANE: It was a 9mm and a pump gun.
CHAIRPERSON: Was that at the same lesson or on different lessons?
MR MAHAMBANE: He first brought the pump gun and then subsequently he brought smaller firearms.
CHAIRPERSON: And each of the students would be trained in a gun?
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes, I will say so.
CHAIRPERSON: Now how did it come you were part of this training session?
MR MAHAMBANE: Sorry?
CHAIRPERSON: How did it come that you were part of the training programme?
MR MAHAMBANE: I was a little bit older than my colleagues.
CHAIRPERSON: Ja and then?
MR MAHAMBANE: I'm saying, he had faith in me.
CHAIRPERSON: Maybe you misunderstand the question. How did it come that you were told to go to this training session?
MR MAHAMBANE: I realised the severity of the situation in the area at that time and decided that one should receive training.
...(END OF TAPE) on how to use a firearm.
CHAIRPERSON: For what purpose?
MR MAHAMBANE: To defend ourselves, so that we would be in a position to fight the attackers.
CHAIRPERSON: When you got the training, were you employed at that time?
MR MAHAMBANE: No, I was not.
CHAIRPERSON: Were you not looking for work at the time?
MR MAHAMBANE: I was looking for work.
CHAIRPERSON: How long did these sessions take?
MR MAHAMBANE: It would be less than an hour.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Ms Loonat.
MR LAX: Can I just ask something Chair, while you're at it? When did these training sessions take place? What year?
MR MAHAMBANE: I do not recall precisely, but this happened after 1985, around 86, 87.
MR LAX: Thank you.
MS LOONAT: Thank you. Sir, you say Mandla was the person who taught you the use of firearms. How did he become a leader in your eyes?
MR MAHAMBANE: Mandla used to reside in G Section but he was requested by the people from L Section to come reside in our area, so that he could help to protect the community and he was also the person who used to liaise with people in senior positions.
MS LOONAT: Who is Bheki Manzi?
MR MAHAMBANE: He's a school principal and he is the person who fetched Mandla from G Section and let him stay at his home for the purpose of helping in the protection of the community.
MS LOONAT: So you say that Mandla was brought from G Section to L Section to assist you all with training and things to do with the ANC party, is that correct?
MR MAHAMBANE: He was brought from G Section to K Section.
MS LOONAT: Is that where you resided, K Section?
MR MAHAMBANE: I resided at L Section.
MS LOONAT: Please tell the members of the Panel what got you interested in politics?
MS LAX: Sorry, can I just clarify something. Sorry to interrupt. You said earlier that he was requested by the people of L Section to come and live in your area, now you're saying he lived in K Section. What Section did you live in?
MR MAHAMBANE: Bheki Manzi brought Mandla from G Section and let him stay in his house in K Section and he was there to assist in protecting the community. I resided at L Section.
MS LAX: You spoke about Bheki Manzi.
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes.
MS LAX: Your evidence was and I've got a note here, that he used to reside in G Section, he was requested by the people of L Section and he came to live in our area to protect the community. Then you were asked about Bheki Manzi and you said Manzi went and fetched him from G Section.
CHAIRPERSON: Well, clear it up perhaps.
MS LAX: Just clarify it for us please.
CHAIRPERSON: Where was he staying? Where were you staying?
MR MAHAMBANE: Mandla used to reside at G Section. Bheki Manzi fetched him to stay at his home so that he could assist. I resided at L Section.
MS LAX: So what section was he assisting to defend?
MR MAHAMBANE: K Section.
MS LAX: Not L Section?
MR MAHAMBANE: No.
MR LAX: So how did you come to be involved in protecting K Section?
MR MAHAMBANE: We were protecting our Section, L Section, not K, it's Mandla who was brought to K Section.
MR LAX: Anyway you can clear it up in due course.
MS LOONAT: Mr Mahambane, please tell the Honourable Members of this Panel what got you interested in politics from your school days? What events led up to your interest, your active participation in politics?
MR MAHAMBANE: Firstly it was the death of Mrs ...(indistinct). After that incident all shops were burned down in the township.
CHAIRPERSON: When was Griffiths killed?
MR MAHAMBANE: Please repeat the question.
CHAIRPERSON: When was he killed? Was it Victoria? When was Victoria killed?
MR MAHAMBANE: 1985.
CHAIRPERSON: Did you know her?
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes, I did.
CHAIRPERSON: How did you know her?
MR MAHAMBANE: She used to represent comrades.
CHAIRPERSON: Carry on.
MR MAHAMBANE: In 1987, her boy, who was my neighbour, Sikumbuso Ndlovo, as killed in Lindelane. The people who killed him who were Mr Tshabalala's men, were arrested but later released.
MS LOONAT: Who is Mr Tshabalala?
MR MAHAMBANE: He was a leader in Lindelane.
MS LOONAT: Leader of which party?
MR MAHAMBANE: The IFP.
MS LOONAT: And this is when you witnessed the death of your friends, is that correct?
MR MAHAMBANE: There were seven of them who were found dead in Lindelane and one of them was my neighbour, Sikumbuso Ndlovo.
CHAIRPERSON: Mr Mahambane, now you got interested in politics, in 1985 you joined the ANC, correct?
MR MAHAMBANE: That's correct.
CHAIRPERSON: And I assume that that was after Victoria Ntenye was killed.
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: You were not a comrade before then?
MR MAHAMBANE: Everyone in the township was a comrade.
CHAIRPERSON: Excuse me?
MR MAHAMBANE: We were all comrades in the township.
CHAIRPERSON: Well then maybe you understand comrades not the way I do. And you learned to use a firearm in 1986/87 you say?
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes, that's correct.
CHAIRPERSON: As a comrade, under which banner did you, or let me put it this way, were you politically active?
MR MAHAMBANE: What do you mean?
CHAIRPERSON: Did you do anything under a political banner?
MR MAHAMBANE: We would hold meetings at the township.
CHAIRPERSON: Is that all? You'd only have meetings?
MR MAHAMBANE: We also used to guard over the township at night.
CHAIRPERSON: What were the meetings about?
MR MAHAMBANE: We used to discuss means of securing funds to be able to buy ammunition and firearms to defend ourselves.
CHAIRPERSON: In 1986/87?
MR MAHAMBANE: Around that time.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes and what were the means discussed and decided upon of acquiring funds?
MR MAHAMBANE: I would inquire from Mandla if the organisation had no funds available and he said there were none, so we were supposed to take our own initiative on how to secure funds.
CHAIRPERSON: Like what?
MR MAHAMBANE: At the time, we used to hold discussions on the issue, but no decision would be taken.
CHAIRPERSON: But surely some ideas must have been raised at that meeting.
MR MAHAMBANE: What used to happen was when funds were available, people used to use them to go into exile.
CHAIRPERSON: Maybe you don't understand the question, I'm going to put it one more time. You say in the meetings you used to discuss funding of the organisation. Now what was suggested there in those meetings regarding the accumulation of funds? How would you people be able to get funds?
MR MAHAMBANE: There were many ideas put forth, for example the stealing of vehicles.
MR LAX: Yes, carry on.
MR MAHAMBANE: I cannot recall other ideas.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes and these meetings were being conducted since about 1985 you say, when you joined the organisation?
MR MAHAMBANE: That's correct.
CHAIRPERSON: For how long did these meetings take place where ways and means of getting funds were discussed? I'm not asking how long each meeting lasted, I'm saying these meetings were held over a period, which, can you give us an idea as to what that period was?
MR MAHAMBANE: Our meetings would not last long because we could not arrive at a decision.
CHAIRPERSON: Now did such meetings - such meetings were held in 1985, correct?
MR MAHAMBANE: They were held from 1985.
CHAIRPERSON: 1986?
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: 1987?
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: When did these, as far as you're concerned, when did these meetings stop?
MR MAHAMBANE: Some comrades fled into exile during that course of time, but they lasted up until 1990's.
CHAIRPERSON: So every year from 1985 to 1990, you attended various meetings regarding the accumulation of funds, am I correct? Do I understand you correctly?
MR MAHAMBANE: It was not only the question of funds that was discussed at those meetings, there were other issues that were raised. I just regret the fact that I'm addressing people who do not know what type of life we led at the township at that time.
CHAIRPERSON: Let me rest you assured that each and every one of us are aware of what type of life was lived in South Africa. Apart from that, the quality of life we lived, different people, has nothing to do with the question. All I'm asking is as far as you're concerned, when did you stop attending such meetings?
MR MAHAMBANE: We used to attend those meetings even in 1990, 1991.
CHAIRPERSON: Now you can remember the only method of accumulating funds that you remember, you say, was stealing vehicles. That was one of the suggestions, correct?
MR MAHAMBANE: It was not only that, but there was also a suggestion for every person to contribute something towards that fund.
CHAIRPERSON: Now were you told now what to do with this, or how was this car going to help your treasury?
MR MAHAMBANE: It would have been sold.
CHAIRPERSON: Who would sell it?
CHAIRPERSON: There are people who buy stolen cars in the township.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, but that's not the question. Who would see it, not who would buy it. Who would sell it?
MR MAHAMBANE: I could have sold it because I know of certain people in the township.
CHAIRPERSON: I see, that's what I was getting at. What I'm trying to find out is once a car is stolen, what would be done with that car? Would the thief go sell it or would you be expected to hand it in to certain official of the organisation for him to sell it? What would be the position?
MR MAHAMBANE: We would have approach Mandla about the latter and he would have to decide how to dispose of the car.
CHAIRPERSON: I ask that question because we've heard this type of evidence before, but yet you tell me you could have sold it. What is the correct position?
MR MAHAMBANE: The primary issue was getting the funds, it was not so important who sold the vehicle. We could have sold it on our own and brought the money back to Mandla.
CHAIRPERSON: Wasn't it the rule that once you stole a car, you should go to your Commander and say: "Look, we have succeeded in stealing a car. We have it. What must we do now with it?" Wasn't that the practice?
MR MAHAMBANE: Unfortunately no vehicle was stolen, but it was an idea that was raised at a meeting.
CHAIRPERSON: So in the five or six years that you were involved in these meetings where amongst other things ideas as to how to raise funds, including the theft of vehicles, you were not party to such an event, am I correct?
MR MAHAMBANE: There were many things that took place.
CHAIRPERSON: Can you just repeat that, Ms Interpreter?
INTERPRETER: The applicant said there were many things that took place at the time.
MR LAX: Didn't he also say he couldn't remember as a result?
INTERPRETER: Some of which he could not remember.
CHAIRPERSON: Where's Mandla now?
MR MAHAMBANE: I have been in prison for a while, so I do not know whether he's still alive.
MS LOONAT: Your Honour, may I add to that please? This matter was set down last year and because it was remanded for this year at that time because we couldn't get hold of Mandla, the investigation wasn't properly done. At the time we were in Pietermaritzburg and Lulama Mtanga was the Evidence Leader and whilst we were there in Pietermaritzburg, she phoned a telephone number that my client had given her. It was the neighbour of Mandla, and that is when she realised that there was such a person, when the person at the other end answered and so this is why we remanded for this year, because there was some truth in what he was saying. It was a gentleman, or somebody called Kholane, who answered and said: "Yes, Mandla does live next door" and this was when the matter was remanded for this year because investigations weren't complete and I believe it's still not been followed up. I personally tried to phone this number when I was given instruction again this year and the number's dead. The number that was given then is 503 5077 and that is what I believe Ms Mtanga dialled while we were there, so there was an existence of such a person. Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: So you tell us that over a period of 5 to 6 years, you cannot recollect whether there was a motor car theft, do I understand you correctly? Am I correct? There was never a car theft during that five or six years that you were attending these meetings?
MR MAHAMBANE: No, there was not.
CHAIRPERSON: Was there any other idea, or other way of raising funds for the organisation that was in fact put into operation?
MR MAHAMBANE: Will you please repeat the question?
CHAIRPERSON: You say that there was never a car theft during that period. Did the organisation or was the organisation able to raise funds in any other way during that period?
MR MAHAMBANE: There was a time when comrades collected or contributed towards assisting others to cross into exile, but that was not much.
MR LAX: But that had nothing to do with the collecting of money for firearms, that was for a different purpose, correct?
MR MAHAMBANE: It was not much, so it could not have bought firearms. We just gave it to the comrades who were going into exile.
MR LAX: So the only reason - the only manner collecting money that you know of that was discussed at all these meetings, was the stealing of vehicles? Do we understand you correctly?
MR MAHAMBANE: No, that is not so. We also managed to contribute or to collect some monies amongst ourselves, but it was not enough.
MR LAX: And besides that, was there any other manner of collecting money, besides the two you have now mentioned?
MR MAHAMBANE: Eventually Mandla realised that the issue of collecting funds was not progressing, so it was decided that we should go rob a bank.
CHAIRPERSON: When did that happen, or when was that decided?
MR MAHAMBANE: In 1990.
CHAIRPERSON: Was it in one of these meetings?
MR MAHAMBANE: Because he trusted me, Mandla called me aside.
CHAIRPERSON: Was it at one of these meetings?
MR MAHAMBANE: It was after the meeting that he approached me.
CHAIRPERSON: Did he approach you privately, or in front of others?
MR MAHAMBANE: He just called me to the side.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes and then?
MR MAHAMBANE: Then he told me that because of our failure to secure funds in any other manner, he realises that we would have to rob a bank and there was one bank that he knew of. He also instructed me to get two other people to assist in that mission.
CHAIRPERSON: Did I hear you correctly, he told you which bank to go to?
MR MAHAMBANE: That's correct.
CHAIRPERSON: And you say this instruction came in 1990?
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: More or less in which month?
MR MAHAMBANE: It was towards the end of the year.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes and then what happened?
MR LAX: Can I just check something, if I may. Did he also say to you that you should get two others to help you? Did I hear that properly?
MR MAHAMBANE: He said because he could not identify anybody he trusted in the meeting, I should look two other people who would assist me.
MR LAX: So he didn't know of any other comrades to help you with this, therefore he told you to find two other people. Is that right?
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes, I think so, that's how we saw it.
MR LAX: Well did he tell you that or didn't he?
MR MAHAMBANE: The comrades were busy at K Section, so they could not have assisted us.
MR LAX: But you told us a few seconds ago that it was because he didn't have anyone he trusted. You told us a few seconds ago, you told us that he didn't have anyone that he trusted therefore you should look for someone else. Do you understand the question?
MR MAHAMBANE: Please repeat that question.
MR LAX: I said to you, I was trying to clarify whether he had told you to find other people or not and you said yes, there was no-one else that he trusted at the meeting, no other comrades that he trusted that were present there and therefore you should find other people.
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes, I was supposed to look for two other persons.
MR LAX: Yes. The issue here is the reason why you should go and look for other people. You don't understand what I'm saying to you?
MR MAHAMBANE: I would not be able to say or state the reason with certainty because he was the one who told me to go and look for other persons.
CHAIRPERSON: Why would you answer like that if you're not sure? You were asked, how did it come that he asked you and you said he didn't trust other people in the meeting.
MR MAHAMBANE: I do not understand.
CHAIRPERSON: Then take my word for it, that was your answer. That he asked you, Mandla called you aside and told you that you should go rob a bank and you should go find assistance with two other people and he did so because he didn't trust anybody else in the meeting, but you.
MR LAX: Is that right?
MR MAHAMBANE: Ja, it's right.
MR LAX: So it wasn't a question that there were comrades that were busy at K Section and therefore they couldn't help you?
MR MAHAMBANE: Those comrades were from K Section, we resided at L.
MR LAX: Carry on.
MS LOONAT: Mr Mahambane, you have us understand that it was Mandla who instructed you to rob the bank in Umhlanga, is that correct?
MR MAHAMBANE: That's correct.
MS LOONAT: You had two co-accused with you. Who chose the two co-accused to assist you that day?
MR MAHAMBANE: I did.
MS LOONAT: Why did not Mandla chose them to help you?
MR MAHAMBANE: He said because I was going to be responsible for that job, I should decide on who to take with.
MS LOONAT: Were the two accused, members of the ANC party as well?
MR MAHAMBANE: No, they were just criminals.
MS LOONAT: Why did you chose two criminals to assist you in what was a politically motivated attack?
MR MAHAMBANE: I knew that they were criminals who were always after money. I knew that it would not be easy for them to refuse.
MS LOONAT: To refuse what?
CHAIRPERSON: To refuse the attraction of robbing a bank?
MR MAHAMBANE: They would not have refused to rob a bank because they were criminals who used to.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I know of a few others who love money too. Now tell me, when you approached these two people, what was the arrangement you had with them?
MR MAHAMBANE: I informed them that there was a bank we were to rob. I informed them that there was a bank that we were supposed to rob and they said they wanted to go see it.
CHAIRPERSON: Tell us that whole story now. One of the things you must do to get amnesty, you must tell us everything. I want to know how you approached these people, how did you persuade them to participate?
MR MAHAMBANE: As I knew that they were criminals who were attracted to money, I was convinced that they would not refuse to accompany me, so when I arrived I told them that there was a job to do and they asked: "What?" I said it was a bank to rob and they wanted to go see the bank and we went.
MR LAX: But how did you know these people?
MR MAHAMBANE: They resided in the township and there aren't that many people. You know your fellow residents.
MR LAX: So they weren't friends of yours, they were just people you knew?
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes, I knew them from afar, they were not my friends.
MR LAX: So they were really strangers to you, just people you knew that lived in the township and you knew that they were criminals.
MR MAHAMBANE: I would not call them strangers because we would sometimes meet at the soccer ground or wherever in the township.
CHAIRPERSON: In any case, you were supposed to be the main person in control, the Commander of this group to go rob a bank, correct?
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes, I was.
CHAIRPERSON: What did you tell them why this job must be done? Did you tell them that?
MR MAHAMBANE: I did not give them any reasons. They would not have accepted my reasons, that it was for political reasons, because these were criminals.
CHAIRPERSON: Did you tell them that: "Look here ..." How did you propose to then share the money? This job -this robbery of this bank was supposed to be done and committed for the benefit of your organisation totally. How were you planning to get away with 100% of what you robbed that bank of and give it to Mandla or whoever, because here you had two accomplices who were criminals and lots of money? How were you going to overcome that?
MR MAHAMBANE: Before we left for that mission, we actually left from Mandla's home and we had planned that we would return there.
CHAIRPERSON: And, were they not told: "Look, when we go on this robbery, this is not a normal robbery like happened in the old days in Texas where we share the money. All this money we take, we're going to give it to the organisation", did you not tell them that?
MR MAHAMBANE: No, they would have refused, had I told them so.
CHAIRPERSON: Did Mandla tell them that?
MR MAHAMBANE: He did not tell them.
CHAIRPERSON: How were you going then to overcome this problem when they said: "Look, we want our share of the money. We're going to split it three ways."
MR MAHAMBANE: That would have been decided on our return.
CHAIRPERSON: I want you to think about that. We're going to adjourn for five minutes.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
ON RESUMPTION
MS LOONAT: Your Honour, may I have permission first to address one matter that arose early in the evidence when I questioned my client about a previous conviction. At the time he denied it, but it's been worrying him because he did admit it to me and it seemed to have escaped my mind. He did have a previous conviction for stealing a purse, for which he got 4 strokes, he was 19 years old and he just wanted to clarify that before he proceeds.
CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct - mike not on)
MS LOONAT: Okay. Would you like me to question? Thank you.
MUSA MAHAMBANE: s.u.o.)
EXAMINATION BY MS LOONAT: (cont.)
Mr Mahambane, you and your co-accused were instructed by Mandla to attack the bank and you left from Mandla's house at the time. The question is, when you obtained - if your robbery was a success, how were you going to convince two criminals who were not ANC supporters or members to hand over the money to Mandla?
MR MAHAMBANE: I trusted that Mandla and Bheki Manzi would be able to convince these two persons to hand over the money. I was the person, the primary person in that operation. I had the cash when we left the bank and from there we were going to go straight to Mandla's home.
MR LAX: Just clarify something. So Bheki Manzi knew about this plan as well?
MR MAHAMBANE: No, he did not know.
MR LAX: Well then how would he convince them if he didn't know about it?
MR MAHAMBANE: There is a person from whom Mandla received his instructions, I assumed that they would be able to convince these two persons between themselves.
MR LAX: Surely if he was going to convince them, he would have to know about the plan? He would have to know what they had done, to convince them to part with the money, surely?
MR MAHAMBANE: With regards to Bheki Manzi, I am just assuming that he should have assisted but the person who was close to me and whom I dealt with directly, was Mandla.
CHAIRPERSON: What makes things worse is that you took these two crooks to Mandla's house and you three leave from Mandla's house on this escapade of yours and yet you don't discuss it with Mandla as to: "Look here, I'm going to bring them back here with the money, you better see to it that you are able to convince them to part with the money", you just assume that Mandla and somebody else is going to be able to do so. How's that?
MR MAHAMBANE: I hoped that they would understand our mission because they were also aware of the circumstances under which we lived in the township.
MR LAX: So are you saying, they would understand that you were on a mission for the ANC?
MR MAHAMBANE: Even if it was not an ANC mission per se, but it was directed at defending our community, because the primary objective was to be able to buy ammunition.
CHAIRPERSON: Now tell me something, this crime was committed in 1991 October, correct?
MR MAHAMBANE: That's correct.
CHAIRPERSON: The ANC was unbanned in February 1990, correct?
MR MAHAMBANE: That's correct.
CHAIRPERSON: By October 1991, Umkhonto weSizwe was fully operational within the country, do you recall that?
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes, but at that time attacks on the townships had not stopped. We were still being attacked by the KwaZulu police.
CHAIRPERSON: Let me finish. Do you recall that Umkhonto weSizwe was operative in the country then? Correct?
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes, I do recall.
CHAIRPERSON: And by then the ANC or MK had already structured self-defence units, correct? Do you recall that?
MR MAHAMBANE: They were not formed in the township.
CHAIRPERSON: Are you sure about that?
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes, I am because there were still no-go areas in L Section.
CHAIRPERSON: That's precisely the point. No-go areas was a phenomenon that arose with the advent of self-defence units. Before the self-defence units came into operation, those that were causing strife had a free hand in the Council and when the SDU came about, that is when people said: "Look, there's no go areas and this is our area, that is your area. Let's keep apart and try to keep peace." Do you recall that? That's how it used to work, isn't it?
MR MAHAMBANE: I recall that, but I do not remember any SDUs at L Section, KwaMashu.
CHAIRPERSON: But you recall that, as I put it to you?
MR MAHAMBANE: I do recall and I used to hear about the establishment of SDUs, but it did not happen in our township.
CHAIRPERSON: You see why I'm raising that with you is that the SDUs, because you say Mandla was attached to through the ANC and the MK connections, the SDUs were being provided with firearms largely at that early stage. It's only long after that, well not so long, the period after that they found it necessary to embark on their own fund raising methods to obtain further ammunition and firearms, but not at that early stage. That's why I'm raising the issue of the SDU with you. Do you follow what I'm saying?
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes, I do.
CHAIRPERSON: Now can you deal with that please.
MR MAHAMBANE: We did not receive any assistance from the organisation in terms of firearms.
MR LAX: Was Mandla linked to any SDUs as far as you know?
MR MAHAMBANE: No, I don't recall. I don't even understand the nature of the SDU's role, because it was something that I just heard about.
MS LOONAT: Mr Mahambane, all of you were armed on that particular day, is that correct?
MR MAHAMBANE: That's correct.
MS LOONAT: Where did you obtain these firearms?
MR MAHAMBANE: Mandla brought them.
MS LOONAT: Did you intend to use these loaded firearms that day?
MR MAHAMBANE: It was not our intention to go and kill anyone on that day, we just wanted to get the money.
CHAIRPERSON: Why was it necessary to come forward then?
MR MAHAMBANE: It was to be used as a threat so that they would hand over the money, because we did not shoot anyone at the bank.
CHAIRPERSON: One firearm would have done that. Is that not so? If it was to be used as a scare mechanism, then whether you have one gun or three guns, you'll have the same result, not so?
MR MAHAMBANE: I do not see how my accomplices would have agreed to go there unarmed.
CHAIRPERSON: That is so. When robbers go to a bank, they expect resistance, is that not so?
MR MAHAMBANE: That's correct.
CHAIRPERSON: And isn't that the reason why you people armed yourselves, to overcome the expected resistance? You know that at that time already banks were being guarded at the front door and in the bank by private guards, not so?
MR MAHAMBANE: Before we carried out the robbery, we went to survey the area and we did find out that there was no-one who guarded the bank and the staff inside the bank were all female. We thought that it was going to be easy to go in there and get the money.
CHAIRPERSON: I'll ask the question again. If it was going to be that easy, why take the guns? You knew that there could be resistance, is that not so, and all three of you were going to use your firearms if that resistance materialised. Correct?
MR MAHAMBANE: We did not know that there was going to be resistance, we just thought that we would just go in there, take the money and leave.
CHAIRPERSON: That only happened in Alice in Wonderland. You must have known that there was going to be resistance, you expected you, all robbers expect it. Now tell me, did all three of you go into the bank?
MR MAHAMBANE: I was in front because I carried the shotgun. Two of us went in and one remained outside.
CHAIRPERSON: And how did you get there?
MR MAHAMBANE: Sorry?
CHAIRPERSON: How did you get there?
MR MAHAMBANE: We drove there.
CHAIRPERSON: By taxi, car, what?
MR MAHAMBANE: We used a private vehicle.
CHAIRPERSON: Who drove?
MR MAHAMBANE: The driver fled once we were inside the bank.
CHAIRPERSON: Who drove the car?
MR MAHAMBANE: It was Themba.
CHAIRPERSON: Four of you went to the bank. One was driving, one guarded outside the bank and two of you went inside?
MR MAHAMBANE: That's correct.
CHAIRPERSON: Now where did Themba come from? It's the first time we're hearing about Themba now.
MR MAHAMBANE: Themba was the driver of the vehicle. He fled. He could not even be found.
CHAIRPERSON: Ja, you've already told us he fled, but who asked him to drive the car, or who asked him to participate in this robbery?
MR MAHAMBANE: I asked him.
CHAIRPERSON: What's his surname?
MR MAHAMBANE: I cannot recall his surname.
CHAIRPERSON: Was he also one of these crooks?
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes, he was.
CHAIRPERSON: When did you approach him?
MR MAHAMBANE: After I had approached these two persons, I realised that we needed a driver.
CHAIRPERSON: So you were going to have to overcome the problem of three other people wanting their share of the booty, not so?
MR MAHAMBANE: That's correct.
CHAIRPERSON: So you were going to go on this escapade on behalf of a political party to rob a bank for what could easily be only a quarter of the booty, correct?
MR MAHAMBANE: The primary aim was to obtain money to buy firearms.
CHAIRPERSON: Have you got any more questions Ms Loonat?
MS LOONAT: Yes, Your Honour. Mr Mahambane, there are affidavits in the record which is submitted by your two co-accused, denying any knowledge of the political motive of the robbery. Please will you comment on that.
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes, that is so, because I did not disclose to them the objectives of robbing the bank.
MS LOONAT: Mr Mahambane, please tell us what happened, how did it come about that Mr Walters was killed on that day?
MR MAHAMBANE: Because the driver of the car had already fled when we got out of the bank, we realised that we did not have transport, so we had to look for a get-away car. Accused number 3 went to the driver's side and I went to the passenger's side. Mr Walters tried to unfasten his seat belt and because of the commotion at that time, my co-accused got a fright and fired at Mr Walters.
MS LOONAT: Did you fire any shots on that day?
MR MAHAMBANE: I do not recall firing any shots. When I was running away, I had the firearm pointed upwards all the time.
MR LAX: May I just ask a question, if I may. Mr Mahambane, in the judgment the Judge talks about, you were carrying the pump gun weren't you, it was a shot gun?
MR MAHAMBANE: That's true.
MR LAX: But that talks of several shot gun cartridges being picked up at the scene of the crime in the Judgment. If you like I'll find it for you and your lawyer can canvass it with you, but you can take my word for it.
Was anyone else armed with a shot gun?
MR MAHAMBANE: As far as I can recall, I am the only person who had a shotgun.
MR LAX: Yes. And as far as you recall, you didn't fire it?
MR MAHAMBANE: I do not recall firing ...(indistinct)
MR LAX: Ja. Please carry on.
MS LOONAT: For the record, I did canvass the one shot that was fired, because I explained to my client that he did say that although he can't remember clearly, one shot did go off and he hurt himself with it accidentally, but he did not shoot at anybody at any time. Thank you. On page 45 of the bundle, line 10 it confirms that there was the unfired rounds in the magazine and one fired round in the chamber, for the record.
So you did not form the intention at any time to kill or even shoot at anyone, is that correct?
MR MAHAMBANE: No, I did not have any such intentions because even before we left, I did explain to my accomplices that we are not going out there to kill, but to obtain the money.
MR LAX: You see, it's all very well quoting from the record, but now you've drawn my attention to the portion that made me think of the question in the first place. It's patently clear from this, I'll read to you
"It's clear from his own evidence as to the number of cartridges which were loaded and those found in the gun which was taken from him, that he's not being frank in this regard."
So it's clear that there were several shots fired, not just one and that's what the Judge found in the matter.
He's telling us he can't remember firing a single shot. At the trial he remembered firing one.
MS LOONAT: Ja, he does admit, he remembers admitting that he did fire one, which was by accident.
MR LAX: Well he doesn't say that here. His evidence here before us has been that he doesn't remember firing at all. You can't give evidence for him.
CHAIRPERSON: Ms Loonat it goes further, that last paragraph.
MS LOONAT: Ja, the last paragraph.
CHAIRPERSON: In the trial it is found that he endeavoured to suggest that only one shot was fired almost by accident, in which he injured himself. So it is clear from his own evidence as to the number of cartridges which were loaded and those found in the gun when it was taken from him, that he's not being entirely frank. Do you follow what I'm saying? So even if he admits to shooting one now, it is in conflict with what was found in the criminal case, although the Judge doesn't go as far as to say how many shots were fired at this stage, in this part of the Judgment, it is suggested that many more than just one accidental shot was discharged.
MS LOONAT: Your Honour, on the same page, line 10, is what I put to my client and that is where it says, on the 11th line, that one five round was found in the chamber, only one and we could - I couldn't find anywhere else others being shot from that particular shot gun.
CHAIRPERSON: Ja, but if you read the whole record, the number of cartridges found from shot gun and he says he's the only one, as far as he can remember, that was in possession of such, it is clear from the Judgment that he discharged more than the accidental one shot and that's the point the Judge is making in the Judgment. I may just add, what crossed my mind is that if they were going to use these guns as mechanisms to create fear and to facilitate the robbery, why fill the gun up with ammunition? I just make the point to you because he says that that was the intention. I'll leave it to you to argue the point.
MS LOONAT: My client did - I did put the question to him Your Honour and my client submitted that his co-accused were just thoroughbred criminals and they would not go into a bank with firearms that had no ammunition at all, but the instruction was not to use the firearms and in his simple mind, a man who is not committed with no criminal record, honestly believed that it would be very simple, they just go and they rob and they walk away and if that did not happen, they would still not use the firearms.
CHAIRPERSON: One would have to be very naive to accept that, isn't it?
MS LOONAT: As the Chairperson pleases.
CHAIRPERSON: I'm not talking about your client. Carry on.
MS LOONAT: Mr Mahambane, who shot at Mr Barkor on that day?
MR MAHAMBANE: It was accused number 1.
MS LOONAT: Were you anywhere near accused number 1 at the time.
MR MAHAMBANE: Accused number one remained outside whilst I and accused number three went inside the bank.
MS LOONAT: So you are not aware when Mr Barkor was shot by accused number one, is that correct?
MR MAHAMBANE: I heard the gun going off whilst I was inside the bank.
MS LOONAT: Do you know who shot at Mr Kouvaris and Mr Craven?
MR MAHAMBANE: No, I cannot.
CHAIRPERSON: You were there, isn't it, surely you can tell us who. You were present.
MR MAHAMBANE: The victims that I remember clearly were Mr Walters and the other person who was shot in the eye. I do not recall with regards to the others.
CHAIRPERSON: Who shot the one in the eye?
MR MAHAMBANE: It was accused number one who was outside.
CHAIRPERSON: The same person who shot Mr Walters?
MR MAHAMBANE: Sorry?
CHAIRPERSON: The same person who shot Mr Walters?
MR MAHAMBANE: No.
CHAIRPERSON: I thought you said accused number one. Did you not just say number one shot Mr Walters?
MR MAHAMBANE: No, accused number one shot the person who was outside. Mr Walters was shot by accused number 3.
MR LAX: Yes, that was Mr Ziane?
MR MAHAMBANE: Ziane, yes, he shot Mr Walters.
MR LAX: This Themba that you talk about, this driver.
MR MAHAMBANE: Oh, he ran away.
MR LAX: ; Yes. Where was he from? Also from KwaMashu?
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes, he was from KwaMashu.
MR LAX: Was he ever arrested?
MR MAHAMBANE: No, he was not arrested.
MR LAX: And he didn't take part in the gun battle that led to your arrest?
MR MAHAMBANE: No, I think he fled at the time when Mr Ivaco was shot and he was perhaps mistaken for a member of the public, so he just left.
MR LAX: You see the newspaper report of this incident says that four heavily armed men were involved in a gun fight, but on your version there were only three.
MR MAHAMBANE: They are mistaken. The driver fled from the scene.
MR LAX: So only three people were involved in the gun fight, according to your evidence?
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes, the three of us.
MR LAX: Now Themba's name wasn't Mavundla, was it? His surname?
MR MAHAMBANE: Mavundla was accused number three.
MR LAX: Because his nickname was Themba Mavundla.
MR MAHAMBANE: His other alias was also Siyane.
MR LAX: Please carry on.
MS LOONAT: Mr Mahambane, you have served seven years of your twenty years sentence and you've had plenty of time to think about what happened on that day. How do you feel about the aftermath of your criminal deeds today?
MR MAHAMBANE: I have never rested since the commission of that crime because I'm aware that people died and some were injured. The primary aim of lodging this amnesty application was for me to apologise to those people and explain to them that I did not really have intentions to harm them, but it was because of the situation or circumstances that we lived under at the time and things did not go according to the plan, so I take this opportunity to ask for forgiveness from them, even though I did not fire the gun directly, but I was responsible for the fact that I approached these criminals and I was the primary person in this mission. I extend that apology, particularly to Mrs Botha who lost her husband. I am not really concerned about my freedom, I have spent some time in prison and I still wouldn't mind to spend more time in prison. It's not the most important thing to be free, but what is of more importance is to ask for forgiveness for the people who were injured and those who lost their loved ones in that attack.
MS LOONAT: I have no further questions, Your Honour, thank you.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS LOONAT
MS DE KLERK: Thank you Mr Chairperson. I don't know - can I please clarify something before I start with my cross-examination? Did I mention that there's a Mr Reed as well, when you asked me the names of all the victims?
MR LAX: No, you didn't.
MS DE KLERK: Please can I include Mr Reed as a victim as well please?
MR LAX: What are his initials, just for the record?
MS DE KLERK: All I have, his name is spelled Reed, but I don't have his... Apparently it's R, for Robert Reed. I did consult with Mr Reed personally and Mr Reed advised me that he didn't consider himself as a victim, however he wished to oppose the application for amnesty.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS DE KLERK: Mr Mahambane, did you at any time during the criminal trial, advise anyone that your role that you played in the robbery was politically motivated?
MR MAHAMBANE: No.
MS DE KLERK: Can I ask you why? Did you not feel that it was necessary?
CHAIRPERSON: Ms de Klerk, my experience was that the judges of the day regarded it as aggravation.
MS DE KLERK: I understand that but in some of the applications that I've moved for amnesty, on occasion my applicant had actually advised them and there was reference in the Judgement to, although it was disregarded, that this wasn't done.
CHAIRPERSON: I accept that. Proceed.
MS DE KLERK: Would you like to answer the question please?
MR MAHAMBANE: I don't think there would be anyone who would believe that story. That would be taken as plain robbery, but I knew inside of me that the intention of this robbery was politically motivated. They would not take me seriously if I would turn this bank robbery into something that was politically motivated. They would think that I'm insane.
MS DE KLERK: Who is Zitho Ncumalo?
MR MAHAMBANE: That is Mandla.
MS DE KLERK: Is it correct, I understand from your evidence, okay, is it correct that accused number 3 joined you later at Mandla's home?
MR MAHAMBANE: No, I don't know that. Will you please repeat the question, maybe I do not understand?
MS DE KLERK: Is it correct that accused number three in the trial met you at Mandla's home?
MR MAHAMBANE: No, I know nothing about that.
MS DE KLERK: Will the Panel please bear with me, I'm trying to find the ... Okay, we'll come back to that when I get to it. You've said that at the meetings that were held, you discussed various ways that you'd be able to raise funds and one of the ways was where you'd steal military vehicles, is that correct?
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes, that is correct.
MS DE KLERK: But you made no mention of a bank robber in order to obtain these funds, is that correct?
MR MAHAMBANE: That came later on in the 90's because it became apparent because there was no other way to raise funds. We started with our meetings from 1985, 1986, up to 1987 but later in the 90's we came up with this idea of robbing the banks.
MS DE KLERK: So was it only this one particular bank that you aimed to rob and no other bank?
MR MAHAMBANE: No, there was no other bank.
MS DE KLERK: So all the while, you must correct me if I'm wrong, from 1985 right up until 1990, even though you were having meetings and you were discussing means of raising funds, you didn't take any action towards - other than the two that you've mentioned to us - you didn't fulfil any other acts to raise funds?
MR MAHAMBANE: There was no other action that was taken except for those.
MS DE KLERK: You said earlier on in your evidence that you were going to see the motor vehicle, is that correct?
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes, although that never happened, but that was our intention and that was also part of discussion in our meetings.
MS DE KLERK: So in your evidence, you've also told us that Mandla instructed you to get two other accomplices to help you, is that correct?
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes, that is correct.
MS DE KLERK: And it was put to you by the Panel that there were actually more than just three of you, there were actually four of you, is that correct?
MR MAHAMBANE: At first there were three of us, but we had no driver and I had to organise someone to drive the car.
MS DE KLERK: And Themba, sorry, was that accused number one that drove the car?
MR MAHAMBANE: No.
MS DE KLERK: But who drove the vehicle?
MR MAHAMBANE: Themba. His name is also Themba, but he was never arrested.
MS DE KLERK: So you did make a statement, a plea of guilty, in respect of the charges that were brought against you, is that correct?
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes, I pleaded guilty in Court.
MS DE KLERK: And in your plea of guilty, you've omitted to involved Themba in the whole robbery as well, is that correct?
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes, that is true.
MS DE KLERK: And in your plea of guilty, you've also associated yourself with accused number one and accused number three in the actual robbery, is that correct?
MR MAHAMBANE: Will you please repeat the question?
MS DE KLERK: In your plea that was tendered by you, you pleaded guilty to the robbery as well as the murder of Mr Walters in respect of your relationship with accused number 3 and accused number 1, is that correct?
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes, that is correct.
MS DE KLERK: And is it also correct that at no stage you ever mentioned that this was politically motivated or that the objective was because of the furtherance of your political organisation, is that correct?
MR MAHAMBANE: I did not mention that to my co-accused.
MS DE KLERK: I know that. You told us in your evidence that you didn't mention it to your co-accused, but what I'm suggesting to you is that you also didn't tell it to the Judge as well.
MR MAHAMBANE: The Judge wouldn't believe me because I was charged for bank robbery and I was going to be dismissed because they couldn't reconcile the two. Any person who was there was going to dismiss that statement that the robbery was politically motivated.
MS DE KLERK: Who represented you at the trial?
MR MAHAMBANE: I cannot remember, but he was coming from the Legal Aid. I cannot remember the surname. He was coming from the Legal Aid Board.
MS DE KLERK: So did the ANC not pay for your legal representation at your trial?
MR MAHAMBANE: I cannot say so, but I do not remember any payment being made.
MS DE KLERK: And did you advise your legal representative about your political motives and your political objectives?
MR MAHAMBANE: No, I did not mention that to him.
MS DE KLERK: In respect of Mrs Walters, who is the wife of Derek Walters, are you aware of the fact that Mrs Walters has - well is since a widow and that she now has to go through the rest of her life without her husband and dealing with the trauma of seeing her husband being murdered?
MR MAHAMBANE: That is the sole reason for me to forward this amnesty application, because I have mentioned that for me it is not important to be freed from prison, but I wanted to reconcile with Mrs Walters, because I remember very well that she was at the scene when her husband died and I even have bad dreams time and again in prison, that is why I decided to use this opportunity to come and reconcile with Mrs Walters, although I'm not the person who actually pulled the trigger, but I know that this happened and it happened because of me, more especially the trauma that she suffered and she's still suffering. He was shot at while far away from the bank. The people who were much nearer were not affected, but a person who was at a distance of at least a kilometre from the bank, is the one who was affected.
MS DE KLERK: Surely, you were very close at the time that accused number three shot Mr Walters, is that correct?
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes, I was very close.
MS DE KLERK: Isn't there anything that you could have done to have prevented the loss of Mr Walters' life?
MR MAHAMBANE: There was nothing for me to do, because when we moved from the bank going up, it was quite a distance from where Mr Walters died, because we were being chased by the police from the bank and even Mr Walters was shot at by mistake because accused number 3 thought that as he was reaching for his waist, he thought that he was reaching for the firearm and when I tried to open the door.
CHAIRPERSON: How do you know that?
MR MAHAMBANE: After the incident, I asked him why did he shoot at the white man and then he said he couldn't see properly because we were being followed by a hail of bullets and by mistake the trigger was pulled and then he was shot at.
MS DE KLERK: But you're telling us something different now. Initially you told us that Mr Walters was shot because he reached in his side, in other words suggesting that he was going to reach for a firearm or something. Now you're expanding on it and you're changing your version now. Now you're saying that it was because it was done by accident. What is the true position?
MR MAHAMBANE: As I'm saying accused, as we were discussing after this incident, I asked him why he shot at the white man and then he told me that it was a mistake because he thought that the man was reaching for a firearm on his waist, only to find out that he was unfastening the seat belt, that was the discussion that took place after this incident.
MS DE KLERK: So then how does the accident part come into it then?
MR MAHAMBANE: I got that from him, that it was not his intention to shoot him, but as we were being chased, we were running away and he panicked and he pulled the trigger.
MS DE KLERK: I understand from the Judgment that Martin Craven, one of the victims, was one of the persons whom you attempted to murder, in that you had fired a shot at him. Do you know if this is correct, or - he's one of the members of the local police services and he was pursuing you, that's my instructions. He was actually pursuing you.
MR MAHAMBANE: I do not understand the question.
MS DE KLERK: Okay, in terms of the Judgement, okay, and also what Mr Craven has told me, okay, he was the person whom you were shooting at when you were trying to get away after attempting to rob the bank.
MR MAHAMBANE: Though I cannot remember that, this happened very quick.
MS DE KLERK: Do you agree, if not - if you couldn't identify Mr Craven, but would you agree with me that you did fire shots at certain protection service gentlemen who were in pursuit of you and your co-accused?
MR MAHAMBANE: As I've mentioned before, I cannot remember pulling a trigger, because even in Court no-one ever mentioned that he was shot at with the pump gun, because they were different from the other firearms.
MS DE KLERK: We've heard your evidence in respect of Mr Barkor, that you were inside the bank and accused number one was outside the bank and it was accused number one that shot Mr Barkor.
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes.
MS DE KLERK: In light of that, I'm not going to put any questions to you in respect of Mr Barkor. In respect of Mrs Druft, what was your role that you played in the actual bank robbery. When I'm speaking about the bank robbery, I'm speaking about in the bank. What did you do when you were inside of the bank?
MR MAHAMBANE: I am the one who was on the forefront. I'm the one who started the whole thing and instructing the people to lie down and I went straight to the counters and we collected the money with accused number 3.
MS DE KLERK: Were you the one that snatched Mrs Druft's chain from her neck?
MR MAHAMBANE: No, that was accused number 3. Even in Court he pleaded guilty to that.
MS DE KLERK: So you played no part in the fact that Mrs Druft's chain was snatched from her neck?
MR MAHAMBANE: We did not intend to take jewellery, but with me - we wanted to take the money, that is why I did not take part in that. My focus was on the money, that's all.
MS DE KLERK: And you were the leader of this whole group, according to your evidence, is that correct?
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes.
MS DE KLERK: Did you advise your co-accused that you were only going for the money, you weren't going to snatch any jewellery or anything like that?
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes, I told them from the beginning that we're not going there to kill anyone, we are just going there to get the money. We had an agreement.
MS DE KLERK: And you believed them that when they agreed with you that they weren't going to kill anyone and they weren't going to steal anyone's chain from their necks, or any jewellery from anyone?
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes, I believed them.
MS DE KLERK: Even though you didn't know them personally, they weren't personal friends of yours, you believed them?
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes, I believed them.
MS DE KLERK: Even though you knew that they had previous convictions and that they were criminals, so you called them, you believed them, you trusted them, I think those were your words, you trusted them.
MR MAHAMBANE: I also wanted to do the job and if we get the money, that would be finished, so we were not looking for any other thing.
MS DE KLERK: In respect of Mrs Smith, did you at any time point a firearm at her whilst you were in the bank and instruct her to open the safe?
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes.
MS DE KLERK: So will I be correct in saying that you were the one that took Mrs Smith then from the controllers room through to the tellers?
MR MAHAMBANE: Even that Mrs Smith, I cannot remember her identity. I cannot remember which one is Mrs Smith.
MS DE KLERK: Who was the one that took, was it you or was it accused number 3, that took the lady with the key through to the safe? Was it you or was it accused number 3?
MR MAHAMBANE: I think it was accused number 3, because I was busy collecting the money from the tellers.
MS DE KLERK: So am I correct in saying then that your whole role in this whole bank robbery and the subsequent murders and stuff, was that you recruited accused numbers one, three and the driver who had fled, you went into the bank, all you did was collect the money, accused number three, he snatched Mrs Druft's chain off her neck, he pushed Mrs Smith at gun point with the keys to the safe, all, your whole role was just merely to get the money, that was all. Am I correct?
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes, that is true.
MS DE KLERK: Thank you. I have no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS DE KLERK
MS THABETHE: Thank you Mr Chair.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS THABETHE: Mr Mahambane, with regard to the shooting of Mr Barkor, do you think it was necessary for him to be shot at?
MR MAHAMBANE: No, it was not necessary at all, but we were inside the bank. The person who shot at Mr Barkor was outside the bank at the door. We heard the gun shot as we were still busy inside the bank.
MS THABETHE: Having your answer in mind, would you say then that the act of shooting Mr Barkor had anything to do with the political objective of your organisation, ANC?
MR MAHAMBANE: No, it's got nothing to do with that.
MS THABETHE: Now coming to the shooting at the policemen, that is Mr Reed and Mr Craven, the policemen who were chasing you, do you think that was necessary?
MR MAHAMBANE: No, it was not necessary.
MS THABETHE: And do you think this action would have in any furthered the objectives of the ANC?
MR MAHAMBANE: No, not at all.
MS THABETHE: Now coming to the murder of Mr Walters, the guy who was in the vehicle, why didn't you try and overpower him? There were two of you, he was the only one in the car. Why didn't you try and then chuck him out of the car and then take the car and run instead of shooting at him?
MR MAHAMBANE: As I have already mentioned that I came through the passenger door and accused number 3 came to the driver's door and on the passenger side the door was locked and accused number three proceeded for the driver's door and opened the door and we couldn't see properly, it was becoming dark at that time and there was noise and we were being chased with a hail of bullets and there was confusion, we couldn't think properly because we were not yet used to that situation and we also panicked.
MS THABETHE: Do you agree with what he did? Do you agree with his decision to shoot Mr Walters?
MR MAHAMBANE: No, I totally disagree that is why I even asked the question as to why did he shoot at him and then he explained to me that he couldn't see properly, it was a mistake.
MS THABETHE: And would I be correct to say it cannot be even justified politically?
MR MAHAMBANE: In your opinion, bank robbery is just plain bank robbery. Even in Court I didn't mention any political motivation, but my intention was to come here and apologise to the people who were traumatised more especially Mrs Walters. It is up to you to associate it with political objective, but to me, this is an opportunity for me to come here and apologise to the people who were wronged.
MS THABETHE: Thank you Mr Chair, I have no further questions.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS THABETHE
MS LOONAT IN RE-EXAMINATION: Your Honour, I just want to clarify one point on the question of Mr Craven. It is my understanding, on page 63, line 7, that there was in fact some confusion and line, the first paragraph on page 63, I quote, it says that
"Accused number three fired directly at him when he was in his vehicle"
and it goes on to say that:
"Mrs Johns and Holman both agree that accused number 3 did the firing"
and not my client. My client was unaware of the firing from the outside. I have no further questions, thank you.
NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS LOONAT
MR LAX: Mr Mahambane, there's just one issue that I'm a bit puzzled about and maybe if you'll clear it up for me. Zitho Ncumalo, you said that that was the name of Mandla, is that right?
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes, that is correct.
MR LAX: That's Mandla who came from G Section to L Section to train you and he was your Commander, is that the same Mandla?
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes, that is correct.
MR LAX: Now in the Judgment at page 42 of the bundle, there's reference made to Zitho Ncumalo being present on the scene.
MR MAHAMBANE: Please repeat the question Sir.
MR LAX: In the bundle page 42 of the papers and your lawyer's showing you the section, it says
"When they were dealing with the weapons by themselves and by Zitho Ncumalo..."
and then it carries on and then it says:
"Accused number three said the weapon he saw protruding from Zitho's belt was an automatic pistol."
Now you've told us nothing about Mandla being present on the scene, yet it's clear from here that he was present. Why haven't you told us about this?
MR MAHAMBANE: Mandla was not present.
MR LAX: Well who is this Zitho Ncumalo they're talking about who was present, who had a gun protruding out of his belt?
MR MAHAMBANE: Zitho Ncumalo is Mandla, but I think this is a mistake, because Mandla was not there.
MR LAX: Well was Mandla maybe not the driver who ran away and was never arrested and that's why you're not telling us about it?
MR MAHAMBANE: No, that is not true.
MR LAX: why was his name mentioned at the trial at all?
MR MAHAMBANE: You were there, I wasn't there. I'm asking you, how did his name come up at the trial as Zitho Ncumalo? In what context was the name mentioned at the trial?
MR MAHAMBANE: We were asked where we got the firearms from. We mentioned his name. That's how he was implicated.
CHAIRPERSON: You pleaded guilty in this case, isn't it?
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes, that is correct.
CHAIRPERSON: You advocate, did your advocate hand in a written summary of what you admitted that you had to sign?
MR MAHAMBANE: I cannot remember.
CHAIRPERSON: But you didn't testify at the trial, did you? Did you testify at the trial when you pleaded guilty?
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes, I pleaded guilty in court.
CHAIRPERSON: Ja and you didn't take the oath and tell the Judge what happened, did you? It was not necessary, you pleaded guilty, or did you? I don't know, I'm asking.
MR MAHAMBANE: I think I remember testifying.
CHAIRPERSON: Well did you testify on the merits or on sentence?
MR MAHAMBANE: I cannot remember.
MR LAX: Just one last thing and that is that - did only two of you enter the bank?
MR MAHAMBANE: Yes, that is correct, the third person remained at the door.
MR LAX: Outside or inside?
MR MAHAMBANE: At the door. He was just there at the door.
MR LAX: You see, if you read this judgment it's clear from this Judgment that Mr Kouvaris and two of the ladies who were inside the bank who testified, speak about three people coming inside the bank. If you like, I'll show you the portions.
CHAIRPERSON: Can you explain that, because it does appear in the Judgment.
MR LAX: Page 42 - sorry, just bear with me one second, I'll give you the specific reference.
CHAIRPERSON: It doesn't matter. I'm telling you it's in the record, in the Judgment that three people entered the bank. What have you got to say about it? Have you got an answer? In the record it states that three people entered the bank. What have you got to say about it?
MR LAX: Page 38, lines 27 onwards.
MR MAHAMBANE: I cannot dispute that because as we got into the bank, the two of us, the one who remained at the door was regarded as inside, though he remained there at the door. That is why the person is saying three people entered the bank.
CHAIRPERSON: Tell me, did you not even foresee that there may be shots fired at the bank when you people took firearms?
MR MAHAMBANE: That was possible, because as we were trying to get out of the bank, we were shot at.
CHAIRPERSON: When you went there, did you foresee that it is possible that you people may have to use the firearms and somebody may be killed? You must have foreseen it, that's why you took the guns. Not so?
MR MAHAMBANE: Do you mean the shooting would take place inside the bank?
CHAIRPERSON: Ja.
MR MAHAMBANE: It wouldn't be possible to fire inside the bank.
CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you. You're excused
WITNESS EXCUSED
CHAIRPERSON: Ms Loonat are there any other witnesses?
MS LOONAT: No, Your Honour, thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: Ms de Klerk, have you got any witnesses?
MS DE KLERK: No thank you Mr Chair. Mrs Barkor has asked if she could be excused. She's not feeling too well with what she's heard.
CHAIRPERSON: Ms Thabethe have you got any witnesses?
MS THABETHE: No witnesses, Mr Chair.
CHAIRPERSON: Ms Loonat have you got any submissions to make?
MS LOONAT: Just my final address, Your Honour.
CHAIRPERSON: Ja.
MS LOONAT: Okay.
MS LOONAT IN ARGUMENT: Mr Chairperson, Honourable Members of the Committee, my Learned Colleagues, Ladies and
Gentlemen, my client is today seeking amnesty for this horrendous crime. In his evidence he states that he was 19 years old when he committed the first offence which was stealing a purse to the value of R4 for which he received four strokes.
He has since had a clean record. ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Ms Loonat, we're not really interested in his personal factors and his previous convictions. Tell us how does he comply with the requirements of the Act. Firstly, how do you say that what he did was based on a political decision.
MS LOONAT: Mr Chairperson, okay. Can I just go on to how he has made full disclosure etc throughout the evidence? okay
He admits that the horrendous crime that he embarked upon in the company of two others, namely the pre-planned armed robbery at the Umhlanga Centre, on 26th of October 1991, ...(intervention)
CHAIRPERSON: Was it with two or three others, that's the first.
MS LOONAT: When I was liaising with him, he mentioned the two co-accused, he'd not mentioned the driver which came about during proceedings. It has left him full of remorse. More so as one person lost his life that day and another lost the sight in his one eye. My client has maintained throughout this hearing that it was a politically motivated attack. Having been subjected to an incessant political warfare in the 80s where he lived and having witnessed the death of friends and the ambushing of the school children and even the death of a lady he most respected, Mrs Ntenye, an ANC stalwart, he knew he had to retaliate to protect his home, his people, their possessions. After all, he was a fully trained cadre of the ANC Military Wing.
CHAIRPERSON: Fully trained?
MS LOONAT: So he said in his application. Lack of finance to procure the necessary weaponry was the only obstacle to obtaining peace, or so Mandla propagated at their meetings. Mandla, a leader in the ANC, who trained my client and supplied the shot gun and other weapons used by all the accused on that fateful day. He planned the robbery and instructed that the spoils be handed to him to further the cause. The instructions were not to use the firearms. Human nature being what it is, things went awry and panic rained that day.
My client admits to removing cash from the tills. He was in charge of the cash at all times. He did not assault anybody, including the lady who lost her gold chain. It was not him, according to his evidence. My client admits that the cash, all of it, was in a maroon bag which was in his possession at all times. He knew that he had to hand over same to Mandla that day. This was how the instructions, the political objective was planned and he knew that he would convince, or he thought he would convince his co-accused, in Mandla's presence, that the cash would be used to promote a peaceful climate to live in, thereby handing it all over to Mandla, the leader.
My client admits that Saturday was a busy day. Lots more cash would be available and as no-one was to be injured, it made no difference that it was a busy, busy day. Therefore it did not occur to him that more people's lives would be at risk, as a result of their actions. My client did not fire at or injure anyone that day and he stands by that. He's trying to make full disclosure as far as he can remember. He still maintains that one shot went off from his gun whilst running away and that shot almost injured him. He admits that whilst he was trying to enter late Mr Walters' motor vehicle via the passenger side, it was his co-accused number three, who did in fact shoot at Mr Walters in panic because he thought, that is number 3 thought the gentleman was reaching for a gun when in actual felt he was trying to loosen his safety belt. He knows now that he was in fact trying to do his seatbelt.
My client is deeply saddened by this tragic death, saddened by the whole event. Money, not murder and mayhem was uppermost in his mind when he set out on this actions. Money, not for personal gain, as he's been maintaining, but for the cause, peace and protection against attacks, political attacks in his section and surrounding. The police did nothing to assist. To quote the Honourable Judge Wilson on page 62, line 20:
"The killings were not committed during the course of the planned robbery, it was during the course of the get away, after arrangements had collapsed"
There was no mens rea until after the get away car wasn't there and foiled their plans, hence the death penalty was not imposed. In fact my client was only trying to enter Mr Walters' motor vehicle to use as a get away, when the co-accused pulled the trigger.
Indeed Mr Mahambane admits to hand picking his co-accused, without Mandla's instructions to pick these particular men, but he did not inform them deliberately that the proceeds had to be handed to Mandla for the course. Mandla, the mastermind, who was my client's mentor, who trained him in firearm use and who had the wherewithal to procure more if necessary, all not for personal gain but for the cause. My client except for that one shot that went off accidentally, injured no-one, not even when he fled in panic and things went awry.
Today he advises that he wish to express personally to the victims families his deep remorse, to Mrs Walters for the loss of her husband, whom his co-accused shot in panic and to the other victims that day. At that time he was full of hate because of the political situation which existed in his area for several years in KwaMashu especially. Today he's full of contrition. The attack that day on the NBS was politically motivated in his mind, to obtain cash for firearms and ammunition for the cause, a far cry from that R4 that he stole. He has made full disclosure today as far as he can remember. He acted on an instruction from a leader who propagated ANC slogans, policies, at their clandestine meetings in the late 80's and early 90's. I humbly submit that the honourable members of the Committee grant my client amnesty in terms of Section 20(1)(2)(a), (d), (f), (g) and (3) (a) to (f).
Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: Ms de Klerk, we don't need to hear you. We don't need to hear you also. We'll take our time deliberating this matter and we'll issue a decision in due course.
MS THABETHE: Sorry, Mr Chair, can I just find out something. With regard to Mr Grubb, ...
MR LAX: Yes, he's mentioned in the Judgment as a protection services person who was shot at with Mr Craven. If you'd like, I'll give you the page reference.
MS THABETHE: Yes, in the Judgment, the person who was charged, who is, I think its accused number - page 57, says he was not found guilty and there was no evidence led of any attempt to murder or ...(indistinct), so I wanted to know whether he is part of the victims?
MR LAX: Just because there was no evidence led about it in the trial, doesn't mean that he wasn't there. We know he was there, but it's ...
MS THABETHE: He was there in his capacity as a police officer, but what I'm questioning is, was he - would we say he's one of the victims in the fact that there was no evidence led as to whether he was shot at or not, so can we really conclude that he was a victim?
MR LAX: It becomes academic in any event.
CHAIRPERSON: No, but whether the criminal court found that or not, we've got to go on what was led here and if it's proved to us that he was there and shot at, then he would, in a normal situation, be a victim by definition. Okay. We'll adjourn till 9.30 tomorrow morning.
COMMITTEE ADJOURNS
