Amnesty Hearings

CHAIRPERSON: Good morning. We are continuing with the amnesty application of Mr Michael Phama, AM3155/96. The Panel and the legal representatives are as indicated on the record previously.

Mr Phama, I remind you that you are still under oath, do you understand?

MICHAEL PHAMA: (s.u.o.)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Ms van der Westhuizen?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS V. D WESTHUIZEN: (cont)

Thank you, Mr Chairperson.

Mr Phama, I want to ask you about the incident at the sports stadium, where you shot at IFP supporters. You testified yesterday that you had information, or that you received certain information that there were people from the hostel coming to attack Polla Park. When did you receive such information?

MR PHAMA: We got that information on a Friday.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Who gave that information to you?

MR PHAMA: The people who were coming from the industrial area.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: On what day did this incident happen, was it on the Saturday or the Sunday?

MR PHAMA: On a Sunday.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: The Sunday morning, when this incident took place, before you went out to meet the people in Khumalo Street, did you have a meeting in Polla Park to discuss what was going to happen or how you're going to defend your people?

MR PHAMA: Yes, we had a meeting.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Who called that meeting.

MR PHAMA: It was called by our commander.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: What's his name?

MR PHAMA: It was Mbatane.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Are you sure that this meeting was not called by Mr Dludla, who was a secretary of the Residents' Committee?

MR PHAMA: That was a separate meeting. We had our own meeting as the people who were defending the people.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Did you not attend the meeting that was called by Mr Dludla?

MR PHAMA: I don't remember attending that meeting.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Do you remember that Mr Dludla was called on your behalf to testify in the trial matter?

MR PHAMA: Yes, I do remember.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: And Mr Dludla testified that he called the meeting and that you attended that meeting, do you have any comments to make on that?

MR PHAMA: A meeting was held on a Sunday, after coming from the stadium. It was not before this incident. The meeting that he was referring to was that meeting that took place after this incident.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: The meeting that was called by your commander, Mr Mbatane, what exactly was discussed at that meeting?

MR PHAMA: The strategy as to how to defend the people, to protect the people.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Yes, what was decided, what were you to do?

MR PHAMA: We decided to go to these people before they could reach Polla Park, because there were women there at Polla Park.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Yes, how many people would go and what would you take with you and where would you position yourself?

MR PHAMA: We planned that we should be placed next to the stadium at Kulabaadjie. It is an open area, more like a veld, so that we should be able to prevent people getting injured and to be affected by this thing. When we moved from Polla Park, we were three in a car and others were left behind. I do not know if we did go to the stadium because we were not at the same place. I arrived there with the people who were with me in the car.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: No, but what I want to know is the plan you actually made there. You say others were left behind and you do not know whether they went to the stadium. Did you discuss there were you were busy planning what to do, that more groups would go to the stadium? What did you discuss, was it part of your plan?

MR PHAMA: We discussed that we should go to the stadium and fight this group of people before reaching Polla Park, as the people who were defending all the operators of Polla Park. That was on a Saturday. We woke up in the morning and we prepared ourselves to go to the stadium. We left the other people who were in that particular shack where we had met and we left in a car. That was the first load.

I don't know about the second load or how many people who were there. I know nothing about it because when we came from the stadium, no-one enquired as to how many people were there at the stadium, that is the operators.

ADV GCABASHE: Mr Phama, as I understand the legal representative's question, she simply wants to know, at the time that you were planning the attack three of you were going to go to Kulabaadjie, the others who were part of the SDU, were they also supposed to go to a different point and attack the same group, or what was the plan? What happened to the others, or what were they supposed to do, according to the plan?

MR PHAMA: It was discussed that all of us would go there. We would go there, all of us.

ADV GCABASHE: Can you just break that down for us. There were three of you in the car with the driver. "All of us" means there were some other people as well, how were they going to go to where you eventually landed up? Just explain that to us.

MR PHAMA: The car that we were in, we alighted from that car at Kulabaadjie, that is the township, and the car left. We thought that the driver was going back to fetch the other group of people. I do not know if that happened because I did not see those people.

ADV GCABASHE: ... was that the plan, that the car must go back and bring more of your comrades to come and join you? Was that the plan? She really wants to know about the planning. Before you went there, what was the plan?

MR PHAMA: In that meeting we discussed that we were to go to the stadium and defend there on a Saturday. After having discussed this on Saturday in the morning, it is the commander who decided which people should go with who and even the car, he is the one who was in control, to tell what was going to happen.

As the people who were in possession of firearms we did not have a chance to say anything. We used to be told that you'd be going with so and so. All I know is that all the people who had firearms were to go to the township.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Thank you, Honourable Member.

Mr Phama, wasn't it part of the plan that four groups would be placed at the four corners of the stadium?

MR PHAMA: That was never discussed, that groups would be placed on four corners of the stadium. Nothing like that was discussed in the meeting.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: You say that you discussed that you will go to the stadium to defend the people, you specifically mentioned the stadium. Were you going to the stadium on that day?

MR PHAMA: I said, at the meeting we planned that we were going to the township at Kulabaadjie, so that the people of Kulabaadjie shouldn't be injured in the process.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Mr Phama, isn't it true that it was known at that point, or at that very specific weekend, that there was going to be a rally in the stadium?

MR PHAMA: I cannot say that was not true and I cannot say that was true, because we never heard anything about the rally.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: You testified in your evidence-in-chief that, or I think you were actually asked by your legal representative regarding a certain confession which you made and that was handed in at your trial, and you said that in that confession you mentioned something about the incident where you killed 16 people and something about the incident where you killed people in a taxi, but not the traffic officer. Do you remember that you said that yesterday?

MR PHAMA: Yes, I do remember that.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: I would just like read a very short portion of that confession to you and get your comment on that. That is on page 113 of the bundle, the second paragraph. This is when you made the confession and where you mention something about the shooting of the 16, the killing of the 16 IFP members. You say - and I'll read it first in Afrikaans to you

"Op die 8ste het ons die Inkatha mense aangeval toe hulle 'n 'rally' bygewoon het ter Tokoza stadium."

Now you specifically mention here a rally, do you have any comment to make on that?

MR PHAMA: I mentioned the rally because even in Court it was mentioned that the people whom we shot were on their way to the rally.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: You see, Mr Phama, I want to put it to you that you knew very well that these people were on their way to a rally, a peace rally that was called in the stadium, and that it's not true when you say that they were on their way to Polla Park to come and attack you.

MR PHAMA: What I would like to know is this. This peace rally, who called this peace rally with who, whom did he send to go there to call the people for a peace rally, because all I know is that the people of Polla Park were fighting. There was a conflict between hostel and Polla Park people.

There was no correspondence that was sent to us saying that there would be a rally that was there for peace, that would be there for peace, because peace is what we wanted. Even when people like Zweletini came, we went to the stadium and it was said that was a peace gathering, but after that the conflict continued. We never received any correspondence from the hostel. I am not sure if that was a rally, but we got the report that we were going to be attacked.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Mr Phama, I want to put to you that there were actually leaflets distributed, in which all residents of Tokoza, over the age of 17 years, were invited to the peace meeting to take place in the Tokoza sports stadium and that it was well-known that this peace rally was going to take place. And I'm going to repeat to you, it is not true that you heard the people were on their way to come and attack you, they were on their way to attend a peace rally in the stadium.

MR PHAMA: I am getting that for the very first time, the fact that there were pamphlets that were distributed. I just get that information for the first time, because we people who were fighting with the hostel dwellers never received those pamphlets.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: I just want to clarify a specific aspect of your evidence yesterday. You testified that your commander, and I think you mentioned Mr Mbatane, used a whistle to give you instructions to start shooting. When did this happen, which incident were you referring to when you said that?

MR PHAMA: Yes, he whistled. At the stadium - that was a decision that was taken at the meeting. He said that he was not going to remain with us, but we should listen to the whistle and when we hear that we should start. Yes, that is what we did.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Can I therefore assume that Mr Mbatane also went to the vicinity of Kulabaadjie, where you alighted from the vehicle and started to fire.

MR PHAMA: He was not in the car that we were using.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: But if I understand you correctly, he was going to blow a whistle to give you a sign to start firing at the people. Was he not there then?

MR PHAMA: Even when the whistle was blown to start I couldn't ascertain where he was, we just heard that whistle and the way this whistle used to blow was different from the others.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: So you indeed heard the whistle before you started firing shots?

MR PHAMA: Yes, that is correct.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: The people who were approaching you from the hostel side, down Khumalo Street, can you describe the group, how were they clothes, as well as whether you've seen them carrying any arms of any sort.

MR PHAMA: They had some weapons. They were wearing IFP T-shirts.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: What else?

MR PHAMA: That is the only thing that I noticed.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: What happened to their headbands, the red or white headbands which they used to wear when they go to war?

MR PHAMA: They had the red headbands.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: It's only now that I've reminded you, that you're mentioning it, isn't that so?

MR PHAMA: I am supposed to respond to your answer. I'm not supposed to lead you, I am only supposed to respond to your questions.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Mr Phama, some of the victims will be called to testify and they will actually testify that yes, some of them were wearing IFP clothing, but they were going to a peace rally organised in the stadium well in advance, they did not have any headbands around their heads, nor did they have any arms or weapons, and here I'm including traditional weapons, on that specific day. Do you have any comment to make?

MR PHAMA: I cannot dispute that because it is not easy for one to say yes, he is guilty, but he can just make up a story so that a person can look innocent. But as far as I know, in Tokoza I do not remember a rally without police, all the rallies that were there in Tokoza, three of them that I know about. IFP had a rally at Madondo Section and a rally at Mtabazimbi Section and a rally in Natalspruit.

We used to be escorted by police and soldiers when we were going to Natalspruit. But if you say those people were on their way to the rally, I don't think there were people who would be brave enough to go and shoot the people who were escorted by soldiers and police. There was a solider, an army base in Tokoza. We used to arrange with the police and soldiers to accompany us to the rally if we would be having any rally. Therefore, I cannot dispute that particular person's evidence.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: The witness will also testify to say that indeed there were police present when they were on their way to the stadium. Do you have any comment?

MR PHAMA: I can only say I did not see them, the police.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Now how far were the people, the first group from you when you started firing shots at them? Can you maybe point out here in this venue for us, if you can estimate?

MR PHAMA: It was a distance from here to hall from where I am now to - the distance between where I am sitting and the other wall opposite me, the hall. And they were next to the fence that was in the township.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Mr Chairman, would that be probably 15 metres, roughly? 10 - 15 metres.

CHAIRPERSON: Ja, that's correct.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Thank you.

Mr Phama, this group approaching you, was that the first group to come down Khumalo Street, that you saw?

MR PHAMA: That was not the first group.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: I want to put it to you that it's my instructions that it was indeed the first group that you fired upon. Can I ask you then, where were the other people? Where did the go to, the other people that you say were not part of this group?

MR PHAMA: We did not do anything to the young ones, we let them pass and the older people, those are the people that we shot at, but the group that was in front of them we did nothing to them. That is why I am saying that was not the very first group. If there were other people who were coming, or another group of people that was coming, that means I never saw them.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Just to get clarification from you, it seems like you're mentioning "young ones", do you mean there young children in this group?

MR PHAMA: Yes, there was youth.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Why therefore then did you think these people were going to attack Polla Park, if there were such young children going in this group?

MR PHAMA: What was happening in the township, in the violence that was taking place there in Tokoza, they were using children. They would put them in the front line. On the 11th in 1990, they took the children from the township to put them in front so that they could be shot at and get killed. We decided upon attacking the people who were actually driving the children.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: So the children in front, you did not regard them as part of the threat?

MR PHAMA: That is why we did nothing to them. It is because we knew that if we were going to shoot the children who were being driven by the people, who were driven to go to the battlefield, we decided not to do that, we had to shoot the people who were behind, not the children.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Mr Phama, I want to put it to you this is a complete fabrication by you. There was a mixed group of people that day, going to the stadium and that included women and children. And this story of yours of children being put in front is a complete lie and that the first group that you, or the people that you fired at was the very first people who approached you on that morning.

MR PHAMA: You can say so, but according to the situation prevailing at the time and what you saw on TV, you would not say that. If you knew the exact situation, you wouldn't be saying that now. But now there's calmness, but during the violence in Tokoza, you wouldn't be in a position to say what you are saying right now.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Mr Phama, on that subject, I also want to put it to you that the witnesses who I'll be calling, will also testify, as was put to you yesterday, that the immediate period preceding this incident where you fired at IFP supporters, was a relatively calm period on that area and that there was, and that this firing of you at the people actually caused the violence to flare up. Do you have any comment on that?

MR PHAMA: What made the violence to come to an end in Tokoza? Will you please clarify that to me. What is it that caused the calmness? Because the violence was ongoing in Tokoza. What is the reason, what caused this violence to come to an end. Will you please explain that to me.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: There was a part written from a report submitted by the ANC, where even the people from the political party that you supported at the time, said that there was a relative calm and peace in Tokoza at that point in time.

MR PHAMA: With respect, I would like to say that those people are lying, there was never a stop in violence in Tokoza. We only experienced calmness after the elections in Tokoza. People were dying in Tokoza because after the end to these attacks, the taxi violence took place now in Tokoza.

There was never calmness, no-one put violence to an end in Tokoza. After that it's only after 1994, when we heard through the media that there was no more violence in Tokoza.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Mr Phama, just to take you back to this group who approached you now, down Khumalo Street. If I understand you correctly, there was a group of children put in front, was that group of children walking on their own and was there then a gap between them and the other people?

MR PHAMA: They were singing toyi-toyi songs and there was a gap between them and this other group of people.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: The group who approached you who you fired upon, they did not pose any threat to you in the sense that they were having firearms which they pointed at you or anything like that, am I correct?

MR PHAMA: The firearms in Tokoza, we never used to carry them as if we were carrying sticks. The only things that you could see were the sticks. Even them, they did not see the firearms. They just heard the gunshots without seeing the firearms, because we did not want them to see the firearms.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Mr Phama, I'm talking about that specific day. The people who approached you as you were standing on the side of the road, were not posing any threat to you personally, am I right?

MR PHAMA: They had their spears and their axes. They could not see us from where we were, of which I do not know what was going to happen if they did see us. We were also - we did not want them to see us.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Mr Phama, that is exactly - that's another reason why they could not have posed a threat to you and your two comrades, they could not have posed a threat to you because they could not even see you, am I right?

MR PHAMA: Tokoza was very dangerous because that Kulabaadjie was attacked Sunday and Monday, and the people, ANC people were the people who were dying in that particular area. Therefore, we couldn't sit down and fold our arms instead of defending the ANC area, because the whole Tokoza, from Methodist Church, it had ANC members, up to Polla Park. From Methodist Church, Penduka Section, up to the hostel it was IFP area. I never used to go there.

I couldn't go there to Penduka because I knew very well that I would die if I did go there. As they moved from the hostel towards the stadium, as they say, that was one of the dangerous situations that could happen in Tokoza, because after coming from their rally a lot of damage would be done, after the rally.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Mr Phama, I think you already testified that you an AK47 with you on that day, how many bullets did you have with you?

MR PHAMA: I had one magazine with 30 bullets.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Did you fire all those bullets on that day?

MR PHAMA: Yes.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: And your two comrades who were with you, did they also have full magazines, which they emptied on the crowd?

MR PHAMA: Yes, they were full, the only one that was left was with the one, the R4 magazine and we had decided that it shouldn't be finished because we were to use on our way back, to defend ourselves.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: And when you started firing at the crowd, were you aiming directly at the crowd, trying to kill or wound as many people as you can?

MR PHAMA: Yes, that is correct.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: And if I understand your evidence correctly, you started firing after you heard a whistle, is that correct?

MR PHAMA: Yes, that is correct.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Now Mr Phama, I just want to put to you in this regard finally, that you went there that day to commit a mass murder out of your own and it had nothing to do with you defending yourself. Do you want to make any comment?

DR TSOTSI: Just a moment. Die the witness say he was defending himself and not the community? Were they not defending the community?

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Just for clarification purposes, himself or the community.

You were not defending yourself or your community when you on that day went and massacred the people.

MR PHAMA: That is the same with them when they go to Polla Park, they were not selective, they would kill everything in front of their eyes. That is why we couldn't go there and tell ourselves that we were going to be selective in shooting. We were supposed to do what they did to us.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: And further, Mr Phama, that you knew very well that it was a rally that was going to take place in Tokoza stadium and that you actually planned to kill the people in the stadium. Do you have any comment on that?

MR PHAMA: I am going to say this again. I want to request you not to say that I knew that there would be a rally, whereas we never received any correspondence that was saying something about a peaceful rally. If we were told that there was going to be a peaceful rally, we would sit down as committee members and discuss, we wouldn't just go there to the rally without knowing what would happen there.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: And just in fairness to you, I want to refer you to the third application that you filed for your amnesty, and in that form you specifically mentioned that there was a rally. And I'll refer you - if you can just ... refer you to page 12 of the bundle, and that is in 11(b), and I'll just read it shortly to you.

"I was ordered to kill IFP members who were at the IFP rally at Tokoza stadium."

And that again is just another, just one of the other factors that indicates that you indeed knew that there was a rally on that day. Do you have any comment on that?

MR PHAMA: I heard that for the first time in Court. I heard that there was a rally in Tokoza. I got that information in Court for the first time. I only knew that the people were going to attack us, I knew nothing about the rally.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Mr Phama, then I just want to deal very shortly with the instance where you fired at the minibus. And in this regard I was to put it to you that my instructions are that what happened on that day is that the minibus was first fired at by you and your comrades, and not by people at the Angus Station, do you have any comment to make on that?

MR PHAMA: Who were there, what kind of people were there at Angus Station? Because I did mention that we had met before and we discussed that in the morning we would go and attack a minibus, the one that was shooting at the people. The other group went before us. I came from the section with the one gentleman.

After crossing the railway line the firing had already started and then it came at a high speed and we started shooting and it stopped. And when the kombi stopped and the occupants ran away and the people from Polla Park went straight to that kombi and then there was this other traffic officer from the coloured area, who was shooting at us. We ran back to Polla Park. I did not go to the kombi.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Do you remember at your criminal trial that there was an independent eye witness, a Mr Petersen, who testified, do you remember that at all?

MR PHAMA: I don't even know that Petersen, because there were a lot of witnesses there in Court.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Just in short, I want to put to you that this man also testified that he first saw three men firing at the minibus and later saw a crowd of people approaching from Polla Park, who probably took part in the attack. Do you have any comment to make on that?

MR PHAMA: Is this Petersen the one who was a witness in that case of the kombi?

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: That is so, it seems to have been one of the witnesses, Mr Phama.

MR PHAMA: That is the gentleman who was riding a motor bike, a traffic officer. He is the one who was following that minibus and when he came he parked the motorbike aside and then he approached, or he came towards us and then he shot, directed at us. The kombi never stopped at Angus, it stopped next to the forest, next to the railway line. That is when the people from Polla Park with axes went straight to that kombi. And we were inside the Polla Park then. I don't know what is it that they did when they arrived in that minibus.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Thank you, Mr Chairperson, I have no further questions for this witness. Thank you.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Adv Steenkamp, do you have any questions?

ADV STEENKAMP: No questions, thank you, Mr Chairman.

NO QUESTIONS BY ADV STEENKAMP

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Has the Panel got any questions? Adv Gcabashe?

ADV GCABASHE: Thank you, Chair.

Mr Phama, one important aspect that I still don't quite understand is the following. This is about the stadium incident. You got word on Friday night from chaps at the industrial area, that Polla Park was going to be attacked, yes?

MR PHAMA: Yes, that is correct.

ADV GCABASHE: Who were these people?

MR PHAMA: I can say as we were working there in the firms, the IFP group, we would dine together and discuss about this violence in Tokoza and we would get information that on a particular day people would go there in Polla Park, or the other group would go to the hostel. We never used to fight at work, we would only fight in the township. And the people would go and tell us the information that they did get while working there.

ADV GCABASHE: What exactly did they say to you? When was this group of IFP people going to support(sic) you, under what circumstances? Can you recall exactly what they said?

MR PHAMA: All I can remember is that the people who came said on Sunday there was going to be an attack. I asked them if that was going to happen during the day or during the night, they said no, not in the evening, but at about 7 or 8 during the day. And we organised transport to go and check if these people were coming through Angus or Khumalo Road. And when they came they told us that they were going to use Khumalo Road. That is when we decided to go to Kulabaadjie, that is far away from Polla Park, so that if we were defeated it would just end there so that they wouldn't come straight to Polla Park and kill women. That is why we attacked them there at Kulabaadjie, because we were defending or protecting women. Because on the other date, on the 11th in 1990, women died.

ADV GCABASHE: Now again, explain this even further to me. Was the report that they were going to come and attack Polla Park or Tokoza, which part of the whole area were they going to come and attack?

MR PHAMA: The report that we received was that the IFP was coming to attack. They used to attack in the township and Polla Park.

In the township we were also defending, protecting the township and Polla Park, therefore we were not sure whether they would come and start attacking the township or Polla Park. They would go and attack the township and we would go there and fight and they would come to Polla Park and we would do the same. We were not only responsible for Polla Park, we were responsible for the township also.

ADV GCABASHE: Now exactly when were you told that they would be using Khumalo Street, not Angus Station? Was that on Sunday?

MR PHAMA: We arranged that car on a Sunday, to go to Penduka Section, on the Sotho section, to check, to watch them and see if they go behind the hostel or in front of the hostel. That is, in front of the hostel it's Khumalo Road. But when they came they told us that these people would be using Khumalo Road, and we were waiting for them there, that if they used Khumalo Road we would go there, if they were using the Angus Station, we would go and wait for them at Tokoza Gardens.

ADV GCABASHE: You were waiting at Khumalo Road, at Kulabaadjie, when did you take the decision to go to Kulabaadjie and not to Angus Station?

MR PHAMA: The decision was taken on a Saturday, that if they use Angus Station we should be placed at Tokoza Gardens, if they use Khumalo Road, we should be placed in Kulabaadjie. That decision was taken on a Saturday in a meeting, the one that was held in the evening.

ADV GCABASHE: Now you held this meeting on Saturday night and you were going to go into Tokoza. In Tokoza you had different sections, you had Penduka, you had all the different sections, did you communicate your information with the commanders in Penduka, or in any of the other sections in Tokoza?

MR PHAMA: The Tokoza people - the people had run away from Tokoza, they went to Polla Park, Mtabazimbi Section, Kulabaadjie Section, all the comrades there had run to Polla Park. Whenever we were taking some action we would be together.

ADV GCABASHE: Mr Phama, as I understand it, and ...(end of side A of tape( ... quite a few SDU hearings, so I have a vague idea as to the sections and the activities of SDUs in Polla Park and in the different sections in Tokoza and in Katlehong. I've heard those different matters. My understanding, and please correct me if I understood it incorrectly, my understanding was that there were SDU units in each section and you would indeed assist one another. If there was trouble in Polla Park, the Tokoza SDUs would come and help you, if there was trouble in Tokoza, the SDU from Tokoza would go to - I beg your pardon, from Polla Park, would go to Tokoza and so on, and Katlehong as well. I'm right about that, yes?

MR PHAMA: As I have explained here, even yesterday, that the people from the twonship, on the 10th, they moved from Polla Park to attack Mshayazafe hostel. Most of this township group, they used to have their meeting at Polla Park, as they were running away from the township because they couldn't stay there in the township. Everything that they used to do, they would do it at Polla Park. I do not dispute what you are saying, that they had their own committees, but everything that they used to do, most of the things that they used to do, they would do it at Polla Park.

ADV GCABASHE: My impression was that if Polla Park needed help, Polla Park would communicate with the commander in the different parts of Tokoza, because he had different sections, and those commanders would send its SDU units to help in Polla Park. This is why my question is, there must have been SDU units in Tokoza, at or near Khumalo Street. Am I wrong about that, were there no SDU units in that area?

MR PHAMA: There were SDUs at Tokoza, but during the conflict, people who were SDUs in Tokoza would run away to Polla Park. That is where they would get a chance to hold meetings at Polla Park.

ADV GCABASHE: My next question, related to the same matter is this, are you saying as far as you know you did not communicate with the Tokoza SDUs about this particular attack?

MR PHAMA: No, we did not tell them anything because as from the 18th we had no communication with Tokoza concerning the attacks, as they were running away from their own place. They would come to us and get a place to hold their meetings and they would go and attack. Even if they were out to attack, they would go there alone.

ADV GCABASHE: How did you know that this large grouping of people, the IFP supporters, would be found somewhere near Kulabaadjie, if you had not been told about a rally? Because you say you knew nothing of a rally. How did you know that this large grouping of IFP supporters would be found in and around Kulabaadjie?

MR PHAMA: I said a gentleman or someone from the industrial area, from the people who were working with IFP members, came and told us that we were going to be attacked. We then held a meeting and in that meeting we decided that we should go there to those people on that particular spot just before those people could get to Polla Park.

In the morning we decided to arrange a car with people inside to go and check what route will those people use. And that car would just wait there at the Sotho section and if they find that those people would be using, or using this Angus, we would go and place ourselves at Tokoza Gardens, and if they use Khumalo Road, then we would place ourselves in Kulabaadjie, so as to prevent them from reaching Polla Park.

Indeed that car went up and they came back with the report that those people would be using Khumalo Road. We went to wait for them at Kulabaadjie and we alighted from the vehicle in the township and then we went through one of the houses there and we waited for them at Khumalo, at Kulabaadjie.

ADV GCABASHE: Who was in that car?

MR PHAMA: If my memory serves me well, in that car there was Shorty.

ADV GCABASHE: Shorty and?

MR PHAMA: In that car that was sent to inspect, we had Shorty and the one that I was in, it was myself, Mahwawa and Joe.

ADV GCABASHE: And who was driving your car?

MR PHAMA: I would be lying if I say I know the driver's name. We used to call him Khaya, that is all.

ADV GCABASHE: Now the IFP people who were coming to attack, were going to be coming from Mshayazafe hostel, is that right? Is that what you were told?

MR PHAMA: Yes, that is correct.

ADV GCABASHE: Now where is the stadium in relation to Mshayazafe hostel and Polla Park? If - correct me if I'm wrong, if you leave Mshayazafe hostel, you would come down Khumalo Street and get to the stadium and then go further down the road before you got to Polla Park, am I right?

MR PHAMA: Yes, that is correct.

ADV GCABASHE: But on the other side of the road, obviously, are all the other sections of Tokoza, so you are saying that those sections would be attacked as they went down Khumalo Street.

MR PHAMA: As they would be coming down Khumalo Road, we wouldn't let them go past the stadium because on the other side of the stadium we have Vergenoeg and the Tokoza Gardens. We couldn't place ourselves on the Vergenoeg side because they would got to Tokoza Gardens, and if we do, we place ourselves in Tokoza Gardens, they would go to Vergenoeg and the people who knew nothing about this violence would be affected.

We decided to place ourselves next to a tennis court. There was a veld there and we would try and push them towards that veld, so that they do not get access to the township, because there were playing children and women would be affected, people who knew nothing about what was happening. That is the reason for us to go towards them as they were approaching the stadium.

ADV GCABASHE: So you shot at these people before they got to the stadium?

MR PHAMA: Yes, just before they got to the stadium.

ADV GCABASHE: And at what time of the morning was this?

MR PHAMA: If I remember well, I think it was about eight or half past eight, or nine.

ADV GCABASHE: On a Sunday morning?

MR PHAMA: Yes, that is correct, it was on a Sunday.

ADV GCABASHE: Ceba, tell me a little bit about Ceba. Was Ceba part of your Friday night meeting, when you discussed, or when the report was given to you about the attack? Where was he?

MR PHAMA: Ceba was not present in that meeting.

ADV GCABASHE: He was not there that entire weekend?

MR PHAMA: The relations were a bit sour between us and Ceba, because we had our own suspicions about him. Because he would disappear for the whole week and if as a Polla Park resident, you would report if you were going somewhere.

ADV GCABASHE: Now tell me, you say you don't know Duma Nkosi, who is ...(intervention)

MR PHAMA: I don't know him. We were not used - I cannot say that completely, because we were not using our real names.

ADV GCABASHE: And Sibeko, I think the first name is Louis Sibeko. Do you know Sibeko at all?

MR PHAMA: No, I do not know him.

ADV GCABASHE: Then one final aspect. That weekend of this particular attack, the stadium attack, just try and recall, the week before the attack, had there been any violence in your area? And I'm talking about Polla Park and Tokoza. Just try and recall. In the week, just the seven days before, had there been violence?

MR PHAMA: Violence in Tokoza never subsided ...(intervention)

ADV GCABASHE: No, Mr Phama, I'm going to stop you because I actually am asking you a specific question. I hear you on the general proposition that there was always violence, I have no difficulty with that, but I'm trying to be specific to the week before, or two days before. Is there an incident you can recall. I have no problem with what you are saying, I'm just trying to bring it even closer. Do you recall an incident the week before, or two days before the Friday night when you got this report? Please help me with that. If you don't, then you do not, it doesn't conflict with your general proposition that there was always violence.

MR PHAMA: What I can remember is just before we launched the attack at Khumalo, we were attacked by police for two days at Polla Park. I do not remember any calmness, any period where we sat down and did nothing, but the IFP member did not attack us on that period, during that particular period.

ADV GCABASHE: Okay, so you are saying that in that week before the Khumalo Street attack, there were two attacks by the ISU or the police or whoever may have been involved from that side?

MR PHAMA: We did not differentiate between the ISU and the police, because the others were wearing some camouflage uniforms and the others were using SAP uniforms. They would just come in police casspirs, hippo that is, or two of them. They wouldn't ask questions, they would just start firing at us.

ADV GCABASHE: My question is, in that week before the Khumalo Street attack, you remember that occurring?

MR PHAMA: I can say that took place two weeks before the Khumalo attack.

ADV GCABASHE: Thank you very much. Thank you, Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Any re-examination, Mr Padi?

RE-EXAMINATION BY MR PADI: Yes, Mr Chair.

Mr Phama, about the incident that happened on the 8th of September, the one that you were just talking about now, you indicated that there were children who were in front of the crown that was subsequently attacked, is that correct?

MR PHAMA: They were not children - yes, they are children because they were young youth, 16 or 18 years of age. It's not children as in real children, it was just young boys who were just toyi-toyiing there.

MR PADI: Were they armed?

MR PHAMA: They were toyi-toyiing. They had some things in their hands. I did not notice what was it because we were not actually looking at them, we were looking at the elderly people who were following. We were actually looking at the adults.

MR PADI: Mr Phama, I'd like to clarify something, to get clarity from you regarding the planning of the attack on the IFP people who were allegedly going to attack yourselves there. You said that the general, the arrangement was that you would get a motor vehicle to go and have a look at which direction the alleged attackers would take, is that correct?

MR PHAMA: Yes, that is correct.

MR PADI: And the driver later came and told you that they were going to take the Khumalo Road, is that correct?

MR PHAMA: Yes, that is correct.

MR PADI: And it was as a result of that information that you went to Kulabaadjie, instead of Tokoza Gardens, is that so?

MR PHAMA: Yes, that is correct.

MR PADI: Okay. Mr Phama, I'd like to get some other clarity on the incident that happened on the 26th of February, the one that relates to the shooting of the Rand Water Board people. You say that - what was the plan to attack the motor vehicle, would it be attacked at one particular place, or would there be more than one spot at which it would be attacked?

MR PHAMA: Our decision was that we would go to Angus Station and attack this kombi, but as we went out late, on our way to Angus, it was shot at Angus Station, next to Angus Station, that vicinity, and then it came to us with a high speed and then it stopped and the people who were inside went out through the right side door, running away.

We saw the other taxis that were using that road and we decided not to shoot because the people in the taxis would be affected. That is when this traffic officer came, shooting at us and we ran towards Polla Park. And a group with axes from Polla Park went out straight to that kombi. I don't know what is it that they did when they arrived there.

MR PADI: The people who shot at the kombi first, were they part of the people from Polla Park, part of the people who planned the attack on the kombi?

MR PHAMA: That was part of that group of people.

ADV GCABASHE: Can you just clarify one point for me, same area. Are you saying that you personally did not shoot at the Rand Water Board kombi, but it's the people at Angus Station who shot at it, you only shot at the policeman who started firing at you, is this what you're saying?

MR PHAMA: I did not shoot this policeman, all I did, I shot at this kombi as it was coming at a high speed. I shot at that kombi. When this police was shooting, using a 9, and we went back, we ran away. We were running away from this policeman and we knew that this policeman was coming from the coloured area, of which the coloured people were giving us some assistance. Because when the things were bad, the women would run to the coloured area. That is why we did not fire back at this police, coloured policeman.

ADV GCABASHE: Thank you, that helps me. Thank you.

MR PADI: Mr Phama, the motor vehicle that was shot at, at Angus Station, did it fit the description of the motor vehicle that you were going to attack on that day?

MR PHAMA: Yes, it fitted the description, because after shooting at that kombi, no car, nothing like that happened, the shooting of the people on their way to fetch water.

MR PADI: Mr Phama, did you have any idea as to who were the occupants of that motor vehicle?

MR PHAMA: The occupants, I did not know them. I got to see them when they came in Court.

MR PADI: So according to you, you were shooting at that vehicle because the occupants of it shot at the people who went to fetch water and you did not have any idea as to who exactly those people were, is that correct?

MR PHAMA: We thought that anyone who would be shooting at us was the IFP members, because those were the people that we were fighting with.

MR PADI: Under cross-examination, Mr Phama, you indicated that the police also shot at you, how do you reconcile that with what you are just saying?

MR PHAMA: Even the police themselves, we were referring to them as IFP, because during the attacks when they were attacking us, there would be signs or signals that were used and we knew that IFP members do not have the flashlights, only the police who use the flashlights, those that bring light during the night.

MR PADI: The kombi that was shot at, Mr Phama, would it be coming from the direction that it used, would it be coming from any one of the hostels that were in constant conflict with your people?

MR PHAMA: That is what was on our minds.

MR PADI: What gave you that impression?

MR PHAMA: We knew that if a car is shooting at us, a car coming from the direction of Mshayazafe, is from the hostel, nowhere else but the hostel.

MR PADI: My question, Mr Phama, is, would a motor vehicle coming from Mshayazafe use the Vereeniging Road?

MR PHAMA: Yes, because the road to Rand Water or Mpompi is Brackenhurst and Brackendown and the one that goes via Polla Park. They couldn't use Khumalo Road and go via the coloured area, because it was very difficult for them to use that road if

they were coming from the hostel. Those were the only roads that they could use.

MR PADI: Thank you, I have no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR PADI

DR TSOTSI: Can I just put a question. Mr Phama, can you hear me? Just about your personal particulars. I see in your first application you say you were born in the Eastern Cape, in the second application you say you were born in the Transkei, and somewhere else in a letter written, you say you were born in Tsongo(?). Where actually were you born?

MR PHAMA: My home is Tsongo. I was born in Tsongo.

DR TSOTSI: Where in Tsongo?

MR PHAMA: At Xholobe, at Mazuchwene, at Mneyla's.

DR TSOTSI: At Mneyla's place. And this man you have mention, the leader, Mbantane, where did he come from?

MR PHAMA: I do not know Mbatane's home, I just met him at Polla Park.

DR TSOTSI: Alright, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

Mr Phama, just one aspect in regard to this taxi. After it came to your knowledge, those of you who were charged with protecting the community, when it came to your knowledge that there was shooting on the people at the tap, from a taxi, did you then gather information about the taxi? For example the make of it, the colour, the registration number, or what did you do?

MR PHAMA: We sent some youth to go and check this taxi, the taxi that shoots at the people in the morning, the colour and the registration number. They came back and they said it was a kombi with the colour of this steel, the one that is on the floor, and they said that was the colour of the kombi. We told them to go away because we did not want them to know what was our plan concerning this kombi. We did not want the people to know about our plans.

MR PHAMA: Did they manage to get the registration number of the kombi?

MR PHAMA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: And did they convey that to you?

MR PHAMA: After giving us that registration number, that was taken by our commander as he was keeping everything.

CHAIRPERSON: So by the time that you launched the attack on this kombi you knew that it was a taxi, is that correct?

MR PHAMA: Yes, that is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: You had an indication of the colour of the vehicle?

MR PHAMA: Yes, that is correct, we were told about the colour.

CHAIRPERSON: And you were given the registration number?

MR PHAMA: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Phama, you're excused.

CHAIRPERSON: Have you got any other witnesses, Mr Padi?

MR PADI: No, that will be all, Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that the case for the applicant?

MR PADI: That's exactly the case for the applicant.

MR PHAMA: I would like to thank you. I am asking for forgiveness to the IFP members, all the families in Tokoza who were affected in the violence because of me. I'm asking for forgiveness, even the TPA that was injured, I am apologising for that, that was not my intention for him to be injured. And my family who was harassed or humiliated by police, I apologise because I do not want to see anyone who is hurt because of me, in the community.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you, Mr Phama.

WITNESS EXCUSED

CHAIRPERSON: Mr van der Heyde, have you got any witnesses that you intend calling?

MR VAN DER HEYDE: No, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms van der Westhuizen.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Indeed, Mr Chairperson, there are about three witnesses that I intend calling.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, would you like to call the first one?

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Thank you, Mr Chairperson. This first witness is Richard Mpanza, and he is a victim of the so-called stadium massacre.

CHAIRPERSON: Will you come forward please. Please give us your full names.

RICHARD MBAGOZI MPANZA: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Ms van der Westhuizen?

EXAMINATION BY MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Thank you, Mr Chairperson.

Mr Mpanza, on the 8th of September 1991, where were you residing at that point in time?

MR MPANZA: I was residing in Tokoza hostel number 1, A4.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Do you remember on that specific day whether there was any meeting called, or any rally, or can you just describe to the Honourable Committee, what happened on that day.

MR MPANZA: Yes, I still remember very well. On the 8th there was a meeting, a peace meeting at Tokoza stadium, that was organised by our leaders, IFP leaders and the Indunas who were staying with us. They told us that there would be a peace meeting. We met before going there to the stadium and we were also told that there should be no-one with anything like a weapon because we were going to talk about reconciliation. That is what was going to happen.

In the morning the first to go out were the people from hostel number 1, where I was residing, and then there was hostel number 2 and number 3. On our way there was youth that was in front, with posters, a peace message. I was on the first line after the youth. As we were walking there, expecting nothing - we were wearing the T-shirts with the IFP emblem. We had our ...(indistinct) shields and no-one was carrying an axe or something.

After some time - we were just following this group of people ...(intervention)

ADV GCABASHE: Sorry, we missed that, Mr Mpanza, you were carrying, what were you carrying?

MR MPANZA: We were having our cow shields.

CHAIRPERSON: Was it shields? Did you have a shield with cow hide?

MR MPANZA: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: A traditional ...

MR MPANZA: ...(no English interpretation)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, won't you interpret that?

INTERPRETER: Cow hide, or cow shields.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh, alright. Thank you. Proceed.

MR MPANZA: We heard a sound. As we were still listening to that, we heard that it was coming from the direction of the houses, but we couldn't see because we were so packed. Then I just heard something hitting me, as I was being shot at.

We moved towards the veld and I was injured. I realised that there were people who were shooting somewhere because people were falling and people were injured, but we did not know what was happening. The people were injured. We did not know the reason why, because our aim was to go to the stadium and discuss this reconciliation.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Sir, on that specific day, were you wearing any red or white headband?

MR MPANZA: No, I had nothing like that.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: This rally which you attended, was that an open invitation to people, or was it strictly for IFP supporters?

MR MPANZA: I can say this rally, everyone was invited. It was not the first rally, the first rally was held at Madondo and the second one was Mtabazimbi, next to the shops, at the church hall. We were discussing peace and they said that the one on the 8th would be held at the stadium, and even the township residents were invited. Everyone was invited, not only the IFP people were invited there.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: The people in your group who moved towards the stadium, were there also people from the township amongst you, or was it only hostel people?

MR MPANZA: In the our group, the first group, people would come and join the groups that were behind. It was not easy to see who was coming from the township, but most of the people who died in that group of people, were from the township. Those were the people who came. I heard that they got injured, but I knew that they were staying in the township, but they were together with us there.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Was this rally organised in advance, it wasn't just organised on that morning? Was it planned beforehand?

MR MPANZA: It was not organised on that particular morning, it was arranged after we had a rally at the church hall and it was further arranged that there would be another rally because we wanted to get to each and every section and talk peace, so that the conflicts can come to an end.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Can you describe in general what was the violence situation fairly shortly before this attack on this specific day? Let's talk about one, two, three months beforehand. What was the violence like, according to you?

MR MPANZA: It was quiet because I think for seven to eight months we had, violence had subsided. It was unlike the previous year, it was quiet. That is, the violence started after this incident, whereas there was nothing before this.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: And after this incident, what was your experience, did you experience the violence to pick up after this incident?

MR MPANZA: Yes, it resurfaced again, because when we were at hospital, we heard that there was violence and there was conflict in most places, places that were quiet. It took place after this incident.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Were you injured in this incident?

MR MPANZA: Yes, that is correct, I was injured. I was admitted for two months in the general hospital.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Thank you, Mr Chairperson, no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you, Ms van der Westhuizen. Mr Padi, any questions?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR PADI: Yes, Mr Chairperson.

Mr Mpanza, can you again tell us when was the rally that preceded this rally that happened on the 8th of September?

MR MPANZA: Though I cannot remember well, but they just followed one another. There were two rallies and then we got injured in this third one.

MR PADI: Could it have been maybe a month before that, or two months or six months? Can you at least us an idea of the time frame?

MR MPANZA: I think it was after a week, but it was not more than a month. They followed each other.

MR PADI: So three peace rallies were held within a period of a month, is that what you're saying?

MR MPANZA: Yes, I can say so. There would be just a short period and then there would be another rally and we would arrange there again and plan for another meeting. Even this one that was held at Mtabazimbi, it was decided that even the people from the township should be invited and it should go on and on. That is why it was decided that the next rally should be held at the stadium.

MR PADI: Mr Mpanza, it was your evidence that there was calm during the previous, during the eight months preceding the incident that happened on the 8th of September 1991, is that so?

MR MPANZA: Yes, that is correct, there was no violence. We couldn't go to the township easily, but those meetings were held in the township. That was a sign that there was no more violence because before those rallies, you couldn't have a meeting, we couldn't have a meeting in the township.

MR PADI: Mr Mpanza, can you tell the Committee why would there be a need to hold three peace rallies within a period of a month, when there was calm in the area?

MR MPANZA: We wanted to create some reconciliation so that people should be able to move freely and people should know that there's no danger, a person can go to the township. Though people were not so sure, but at least these rallies would prove that there was peace, because people could move freely and go to wherever they wanted to.

MR PADI: During the period of calm that you are referring to, do you know of any incident where maybe a person from the hostel would get hurt because he went to the location, or visa-versa, a person from the location would get hurt because he was at the hostel?

MR MPANZA: Though I am not sure about that, but we couldn't hear such things. People were just scared because since the violence, people couldn't sit together or meet and be together. They were not sure about their safety.

MR PADI: Mr Mpanza, you indicated that on your way to the stadium, on the 8th of September '91, you were carrying shields, is that correct?

MR MPANZA: Yes, that is correct.

MR PADI: These are the shields that you would normally carry with sticks or spears, is that so?

MR MPANZA: There were no spears. We were told not to take them with, though it used to happen in our meetings, but in this particular meeting we were told not to carry them because the people might perceive this as the beginning of some conflict. We were told to have our shields and some sticks that would show that no-one was prepared to harm anyone.

MR PADI: Mr Mpanza, my question was, the shields that you were carrying on that day, were they shields that you would normally carry with sticks and spears?

MR MPANZA: The shield is the one that we use even if we were dancing, in whatever occasion, those were the shields that we were using - we had on that particular day.

ADV GCABASHE: No, Mr Mpanza, all that the attorney wants to know is, usually, forget about this particular day, but usually when you were carrying your shield, you would normally carry it with a stick as well, or depending on the occasion, with a spear. He's not talking about this particular incident.

MR MPANZA: Yes, that is correct.

INTERPRETER: The speaker's mike is not on.

MR MPANZA: You can use a shield with a spear or with a stick, there is no difference, it's just one thing. We don't have specific shields that are used with sticks or with spears, it's only one shield that we were using.

ADV GCABASHE: Would you carry the spear on its own? That is essentially what he wants to know. Just normally - we're not talking about this incident, would you carry it just on its own with nothing else?

MR MPANZA: Yes, you do carry a spear without a shield.

ADV GCABASHE: But again, just to finalise this aspect, you were saying that on this occasion you had your spear and you had sticks, but no spears? I beg your pardon, you had your shield and stick, but no spear, on this occasion?

MR MPANZA: Yes, there were no spears. We were told that no-one was allowed to carry the spears, a person should only have a spear - I beg your pardon, a shield or perhaps a stick, not a spear.

MR PADI: Mr Mpanza, you said that you were on the front line, immediately after the youth, is that correct?

MR MPANZA: Yes, that is correct, I was in front, I was in the very first line and there were youth in front of us.

MR PADI: So Mr Mpanza, it is possible that there could have been people who were behind you, who were carrying sticks and spears, that you could not have been aware of?

MR MPANZA: I cannot dispute that, but if that did happen, they did not do as instructed, but among the people who were with me, I did not see those things.

MR PADI: Mr Mpanza, it was your evidence that the rally that was organised was organised for a reconciliation, is that correct?

MR MPANZA: Yes, that is correct, that is what I knew. That was arranged solely for reconciliation.

MR PADI: The reconciliation that was arranged, with whom was that reconciliation going to be?

MR MPANZA: From our leaders they said that it would be discussed with the township residents, that no IFP or ANC or anything, people should be one, they should discuss issues and be one. That was the process. It was just said that people from the township, ANC people from Polla Park, there should be good relations as before.

MR PADI: Were the people from Polla Park informed of this meeting?

MR MPANZA: Though I cannot be certain that they were affected, but as things were done we thought that that was done properly. They were supposed to be told about that.

MR PADI: Mr Mpanza, do you have any idea as to how the messages would be conveyed to the people in the townships, or maybe even to the Polla Park people, with whom the reconciliation was intended?

MR MPANZA: We knew that if our leaders had organised that they know how to communicate with the other groups of people, without getting us to know what was going to happen, but if they had made mention of such a thing, they knew how to communicate with the other groups of people.

MR PADI: Mr Mpanza, it was again your evidence that on the march to the stadium on that particular day there were people from the township, is that correct?

MR MPANZA: Yes, there were people from the township who were following us. As we were at the front we could see that there people who were coming.

MR PADI: Mr Mpanza, the way in which the area of Tokoza became, there were areas within the townships which were regarded as IFP areas, where the IFP people lived, is that correct?

MR MPANZA: Yes, there were places like that. As time went on during those conflicts it was realised that in those areas, those areas were occupied by IFP members, but most people were not chased away, they just disappeared without being told to leave their houses or told to go away. People would just fear for their safety and decide to go away, but there was no reason for them to leave their houses, no-one told them to leave their houses. We saw the houses empty and we would get the information that people had left their houses.

MR PADI: So Mr Mpanza, the people who joined the rally from the townships, were actually coming from the IFP area, is that correct?

MR MPANZA: I cannot say that they were coming from the IFP area, because in those places that we had passed, those places were far away from the hostels, it was quite a distance from the hostel.

We were towards the township, we were at the township where we got injured. No IFP members was staying in that vicinity.

MR PADI: You testified that you were not wearing a red headband, is that so?

MR MPANZA: Yes, that is correct.

MR PADI: Were there other people who were wearing red headbands?

MR MPANZA: If there were such people I couldn't see them because it was such a large group of people, but the people who were in my group, no-one was, I did not see anyone wearing a red headband.

MR PADI: Mr Mpanza, I put it to you that on the march which took place on the 8th of September 1991, there were people who were actually armed on that particular day, what do you say to that?

MR MPANZA: If you say there were such people ...(intervention)

MR MPANZA: Will you please repeat your question?

MR PADI: Mr Mpanza, I say that I put it to you that on the 8th of September 1991, on the march to the stadium, there were people who were armed, who were carrying spears and sticks, together with their shields.

MR MPANZA: I did not see people with spears, I saw people with sticks and shields. As I myself, I was also carrying a shield and a stick. I did not see the spears.

MR PADI: You were carrying a stick on that day, Mr Mpanza.

MR MPANZA: Yes, I had a black shield and a stick.

MR PADI: In your evidence-in-chief, you said that you were only carrying a shield, it's only now that state that you were actually armed with a stick.

ADV GCABASHE: No, Mr Padi, he corrected that. Further down he explained exactly what he was carrying.

MR PADI: Okay.

ADV GCABASHE: Let me finish. His evidence-in-chief is that there were people with sticks and spears - I beg your pardon, with shields and with sticks and as I understood him, he too was one of those. It's the spears that he has disputed all along, not the other implements.

MR PADI: Okay, thank you Honourable Committee Member.

Mr Mpanza, I again put it to you that in the period that preceded the incident that happened on the 8th of September 1991, there was no calm, as you indicated.

MR MPANZA: It means that we did experience that, but in our areas, in the areas where we were we couldn't reach those areas if there was. We wouldn't be there, we wouldn't reach those areas if there was violence. We did not hear anything about violence, we knew that there were sound relations because all those things were discussed, that all those things that were happening should come to an end.

MR PADI: I again put it to you, Mr Mpanza, that on that particular march there were people who were wearing red bands which were normally worn when people were going to war.

MR MPANZA: I cannot dispute that because I did not see them, but the people that I saw did not have the red headbands.

MR PADI: Thank you, no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR PADI

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you, Mr Padi. Mr van der Heyde, have you got any questions?

MR VAN DER HEYDE: I have no further questions.

NO QUESTIONS BY MR VAN DER HEYDE

ADV STEENKAMP: No questions thank you, Mr Chairman.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: None, thank you, Mr Chairperson.

NO RE-EXAMINATION BY MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN

DR TSOTSI: Your group was marching to the stadium, is that correct?

MR MPANZA: Yes, that is correct.

DR TSOTSI: ...(indistinct)

MR MPANZA: I did not see them, but if they were there we would meet at the stadium.

DR TSOTSI: Did it ever happen that you marched together with the ANC members?

MR MPANZA: During that period that never happened, it only happened once, that was long ago. That took place after the elections, but that never happened before. It took place when we met at the meeting, we would discuss in a meeting and then we would part after the meeting.

DR TSOTSI: Who was going to be reconciled? You were going to this meeting at the stadium to bring about a reconciliation between whom?

MR MPANZA: Between the IFP members and ANC, and the township residents, because it's not everyone, not everyone belonged to a political organisation. But violence that is caused by political organisations normally affect the people who were neutral. All those people would be affected if two organisations were fighting.

It becomes difficult to differentiate between a neutral person and a one who belongs to a political organisation. Therefore, it was planned that we would discuss reconciliation and sound relations between, among all the people.

DR TSOTSI: Did you see any ANC group marching towards the stadium?

MR MPANZA: No, not at the time because we had not reached the stadium, we were still on our way to the stadium.

ADV GCABASHE: Thank you, Chair. Hostel number 1, A4 block, which hostel is that? We know of Mshayazafe hostel, we've heard of Kwesini hostel in these hearings, what was yours called?

MR MPANZA: This is the first hostel, called number 1, Madala hostel.

ADV GCABASHE: And next to it would be which one?

MR MPANZA: Katuza hostel and Mshayazafe, the third one.

ADV GCABASHE: The three of them essentially formed a block? Now what was the distance from the point where you were injured, to your hostel, where you left your gate, roughly?

MR MPANZA: It's quite a distance because I had gone past some sections and Basotho section in the township, it's quite a long distance from there. The hostel was at a distance. We were in the middle of the township.

ADV GCABASHE: You had been walking for what, 15 minutes?

MR MPANZA: Perhaps 20 minutes, but it depended on the pace, perhaps 20 minutes to half an hour took us there.

ADV GCABASHE: And ahead of you, as you walked, because you were the front runners, did you see any of the other townships residents come out and walk towards the stadium? Not your group, but the people from the township generally?

MR MPANZA: The people who would come, they were coming from the houses. The others would just stand there, but most of the people would join the groups that were behind. The only people who were in front of us were the youth.

ADV GCABASHE: Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Mr Mpanza.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms van der Westhuizen, have you got anything else?

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Yes, Mr Chairperson, there are probably two other witnesses that I intend calling.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, have you got any further questions for this one?

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Oh thank you, Mr Chairperson, no questions.

NO QUESTIONS BY MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, he's excused.

WITNESS EXCUSED

CHAIRPERSON: We'll adjourn for 15 minutes.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, Ms van der Westhuizen?

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Thank you, Mr Chairperson, I would like to call Mr Fundakwe Zakhe Ndwandwe. He is one of the victims of the taxi incident.

ADV GCABASHE: What are his first names?

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Fundakwe Zakhe, and the surname is Ndwandwe. Thank you.

FUNDAKWE ZAKHE NDWANDWE: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, please sit down. Ms van der Westhuizen?

EXAMINATION BY MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Thank you, Mr Chairperson.

Mr Ndwandwe, on the 26th of February 1992, you were a passenger in a minibus that was shot upon, is that correct?

MR NDWANDWE: Yes, that is correct.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Where did you get onto this minibus, where were you from?

MR NDWANDWE: It was at the hostel entrance, at Katuza hostel, where I was residing. I got into the kombi there at that entrance.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Where were you going to?

MR NDWANDWE: I was going to my workplace at Rand Water Board, Mpompi.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: This minibus that you boarded, was that a normal minibus or was it a minibus that was specially contracted to take workers to the Rand Water Board?

MR NDWANDWE: It is a kombi that was hired, it was taking the staff, only the staff of Rand Water Board.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Why didn't you use a normal or any other taxi to Rand Water Board?

MR NDWANDWE: It is because the taxis who were coming from the office in Natalspruit, they go as far as Brackendown, they do not go as far as Rand Water Board, that is why we had to make use of this other one.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Before this incident took place, this shooting on the minibus, how long had you been using this specific minibus to work? Just a rough idea.

MR NDWANDWE: We started using this car just before 1990. I think in 1989 we were already using this car.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Now on that specific day, on your way to work, a specific shooting incident happened, will you please in your own words describe exactly what you can remember what happened there.

MR NDWANDWE: Early in the morning we boarded that kombi at ten past six. At about half past six, just opposite Polla Park, when the kombi was there, there was a truck in front of us that was disturbing us. When we overtook this truck the shooting started. Instead of taking a turn at a certain point, it went ahead. Just before that corner - I think even the driver, the way he looked at me, I could see that he was shot at and the taxi went straight and the firing continued and it was prevented by the pavement to go on.

I lifted up my head and I saw that the driver doesn't look normal, because the car was on, but it was not moving and I realised that others were shot in the car. I went out of the window because as I tried to get out, using the door, and the one who was before me fell, he was shot and he fell there and I decided, because the window was already broken, I went out through the window.

I fell and they came, two men came and they were shooting and I did not even know where they came from. They continued firing. I even stood up, running away. I did not see them, but I could feel that there were two people. They continued firing and I ran towards Rand Water Board, on foot.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Did you only see two gentlemen, who fired at you?

MR NDWANDWE: Yes, I saw two men, because they were shooting at me. As I was lying down I saw two men.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Now do you remember at all when you passed Angus Station, whether were shots already fired from that direction towards your kombi?

MR NDWANDWE: I was awake, no-one shot at the kombi there, but while we were next to Polla Park, or opposite Polla Park, the shooting started and it even went ahead instead of taking a turn towards Mpompi or Rand Water Board. They continued shooting and I even got out of the car and I fell and I saw these men shooting. No-one shot at Angus Station.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Were you actually injured in this incident?

MR NDWANDWE: Yes, I was injured. A piece from the window pierced through my flesh. That is the only one that injured me, that was on the right-hand side.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Now Mr Ndwandwe, you heard some evidence of the applicant, that men or people travelling in a minibus, fitting the description of the one that you regularly used, fired at people who used to get water from a tap. Whilst you've been using this specific minibus, have you ever had firearms with you and used that to fire in the direction of the tap or whatever?

MR NDWANDWE: It is difficult, because if you are on your way to work there is nothing, you cannot have a weapon and no-one shot from that kombi. We were not carrying any firearms. I don't even know how to use a firearm. No-one had a firearm because we were on our way to work and there would be roadblocks and no-one could carry a firearm knowing very well that there would be roadblocks.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Thank you, Mr Chairperson, no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Questions, Mr Padi?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR PADI: Yes, Mr Chair.

Mr Ndwandwe, can you tell the Committee which political party you belong to, or you were affiliated with at the time of the incident?

MR NDWANDWE: ...(no interpretation coming through)

ADV GCABASHE: Sorry, Mr Interpreter, it's not coming through.

INTERPRETER: I think we have a problem, this mike is not ...(indistinct)

ADV STEENKAMP: Sorry, while we wait. This witness' statement actually appears on page 130 of the bundle.

CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct)

ADV STEENKAMP: Yes, Mr Chairman, just for the record.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, carry on.

MR NDWANDWE: The answer is; I was not a member of any political organisation, I was just an employee at Rand Water Board, residing at the hostel.

MR PADI: The people that you were travelling with in the motor vehicle, do you have any idea if they were affiliated to any political organisation?

MR NDWANDWE: No.

MR PADI: Mr Ndwandwe, it is your evidence that ...(intervention)

MR NDWANDWE: I cannot say there was anyone who was a member of any political organisation.

MR PADI: Mr Ndwandwe, you said that you were not carrying a gun on you on that particular day of the incident, is that correct?

MR NDWANDWE: Yes, that is correct.

MR PADI: Do you have any idea if any of the occupants of the motor vehicle were carrying a firearm?

MR NDWANDWE: I know them fully well, no-one was carrying a firearm.

MR PADI: Mr Ndwandwe, you indicated that the motor vehicle was not shot at, at the Angus Station, is that correct?

MR NDWANDWE: Yes, it was not shot at the station.

MR PADI: Was the motor vehicle shot at only once or on more than one occasion?

MR NDWANDWE: It was shot at continuously. Until I got out of the vehicle, the shooting continued. I fled to my workplace and during that period the shooting was continuing.

MR PADI: Mr Ndwandwe, I put it to you that the motor vehicle was first shot at, at Angus Station.

MR NDWANDWE: No, it was not shot there. I was watching.

MR PADI: Mr Ndwandwe, I again put it to you that the occupants of the motor vehicle that you were travelling in were the people who were shooting at the people at Polla Park, whilst they were going to fetch water.

MR NDWANDWE: No, that never happened. Ever since I started using this vehicle in 1989, we never fired at anybody.

MR PADI: Thank you, no further questions, Mr Chairperson.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR PADI

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Padi. Mr van der Heyde, any questions?

MR VAN DER HEYDE: No questions, Mr Chairperson.

NO QUESTIONS BY MR VAN DER HEYDE

CHAIRPERSON: Adv Steenkamp?

ADV STEENKAMP: No questions, thank you, Mr Chairman.

NO QUESTIONS BY ADV STEENKAMP

CHAIRPERSON: The Panel? Re-examination?

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: None, Mr Chairperson.

NO RE-EXAMINATION BY MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Ndwandwe, you are excused, thank you.

WITNESS EXCUSED

CHAIRPERSON: Who is the next witness?

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: The next witness will be Eunice Tshabala - Tabango. I apologise.

CHAIRPERSON: Will she please come forward.

MASARETSE EUNICE TSHABANGU: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: You may be seated. Ms van der Westhuizen?

EXAMINATION BY MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Thank you, Mr Chairperson.

Mrs Tshabangu, am I correct if I state that you are the wife the driver of the minibus, which was shot at on the 26th of February 1992?

MS TSHABANGU: That is correct.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: And your husband, the driver, he died in that incident, is that correct?

MS TSHABANGU: That is correct.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: How many children do you have?

MS TSHABANGU: Two children.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Are you employed?

MS TSHABANGU: No.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Who is looking after you and the children financially?

MS TSHABANGU: There's nobody taking care of us.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: At that point in time, I'm referring to the 26th of February 1992, where did you and your husband reside? Were you hostel residents, where did you stay?

MS TSHABANGU: We were residing in Tokoza, in the township.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Now you - at that stage, were you affiliated to any political party?

MS TSHABANGU: No.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Do you know whether your husband was affiliated to any political party?

MS TSHABANGU: No, he was not involved in politics.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: On that day when this incident happened, do you know where he was travelling to?

MS TSHABANGU: On the day in question I was not at home, but when I left he was already transporting people to Rand Water Board. I was in Cape Town at the time of the incident.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Is there anything else you want to add, or state before this Committee?

MS TSHABANGU: What I would like to say is that it was very painful for me to lose my husband in the manner in which he died, because he was not involved in politics. It was just unfortunate that he died at the time. I am the survivor, I'm talking care of the children, nobody is helping me out. I am fending for my children. If it were possible to get help pertaining to my children, I would be very pleased.

And insofar as the person who killed him, doctor, his would be to ask for forgiveness from his God. There's nothing more I can say.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Thank you, Mr Chairperson, no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you. Mr Padi, any questions

MR PADI: No questions, Mr Chair.

NO QUESTIONS BY MR PADI

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr van der Heyde?

MR VAN DER HEYDE: No questions, Mr Chairperson.

NO QUESTIONS BY MR VAN DER HEYDE

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Steenkamp?

ADV STEENKAMP: No questions, Mr Chairman.

NO QUESTIONS BY ADV STEENKAMP

CHAIRPERSON: Panel?

ADV GCABASHE: Ms Tshabangu, just one question. The kombi your husband owned was a private kombi that the Rand Water Board employees hired, it wasn't a Rand Water Board kombi?

MS TSHABANGU: This was his father's kombi.

ADV GCABASHE: Thank you. Thank you, Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Re-examination?

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: None, Mr Chairperson.

NO RE-EXAMINATION BY MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Tshabangu, you're excused, thank you.

WITNESS EXCUSED

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Mr Chairperson, those are all the witnesses I intended calling on behalf of the people that I'm representing, thank you very much.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you, Ms van der Westhuizen. Mr Padi, have you got any submissions?

MR PADI: Yes, Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Go ahead.

MR PADI IN ARGUMENT: Regarding the incident that took place on the 8th of September 1991, it was the evidence of the applicant and even under cross-examination, that they got a word that they were going to be attacked. It was not actually the first

time that it happened. It was not the first that it has happened that they got a word that they were going to be attacked and the attack actually happened.

As a result of the previous attacks, children and women were killed in Polla Park. So because they got this word, they took precaution and followed the common saying that says that the best form defence is actually attack. So they went and attacked their would-be attackers before they actually got to where their children and women were.

It is my submission that this incident happened in the context of a political conflict that was ongoing in the areas of Tokoza and Katlehong, in which Polla Park was situated.

Under cross-examination my learned colleague referred to some documents which were allegedly written by the ANC, which indicated that there was calm in the area in the period preceding the incident of the 8th of September 1991. My submission is that that is actually not correct, because it actually defies logic, why there would be a peace rally when there's actually peace in the area.

The applicant in his evidence-in-chief stated that there were several attacks on the people at Polla Park, at the period that preceded the actual attack. My learned colleagues again made a submission that the people who were attacked on the day in question were actually unarmed.

I wish to refer the Honourable Committee to the evidence of Mr Mpanza. Mr Mpanza indicated that even he was armed with a stick and a shield and that he could not have had any knowledge if there were other people who were coming from behind him, who were armed. So my submission is that the people who were on the march on the day of the incident, were actually armed.

So the evidence of the applicant is that they were under the impression that those people were the people who were going to attack them and they did that in order to avoid that attack. As a result the people were shot.

I again make a submission that the incident that happened on the - the incident in question that happened on the 8th of September 1991, actually falls within the ambit of the Act, especially in relation to Section 20(3)(d). The Section states that for an offence to be associated with a political objective it has to be directed at a political opponent. And this act was actually directed at the applicant and the applicant's political parties, political opponents.

I again make a submission that the applicant made a full disclosure in relation to this one particular incident and it again falls within the time periods which were indicated by the - which are required by the Act.

As a result, the applicant complied with all the requirements of the Act and therefore I request that the Honourable Committee grants the applicant amnesty in relation to this incident.

Next I would like to refer the Honourable Committee to the incident that took place on the 26th of February 1992. This incident relates to the killing of four people who were travelling in a kombi at the Vereeniging Road.

From the evidence-in-chief of the applicant, there was this particular kombi that was shot at. The occupants used to shoot at people who were going to fetch water from the tap just outside Polla Park. It was common knowledge that the residents of Polla Park had their arch enemies, which were people from the hostels and this evidence was not disputed under cross-examination, and that the occupants of the motor vehicle actually came from the hostel, as it was corroborated by the evidence of Mr Mpanza.

The applicant stated that he took this action under the command of his commander, who gave instructions that that particular kombi should be shot at in order to avoid future attacks on the people of Polla Park. It is my submission again that this particular incident falls within the ambit of the Act, again with particular reference to Section 20(3)(d) of the Act, which states that this was again directed at the political opponents and again this act was done under direct instructions of the commander of the applicant.

I again make a submission that the applicant made a full disclosure in regard to the this particular incident and it falls within the time limits of the Act and therefore he complied with all the requirements of the Act and as a result I request the Honourable Committee to grant the applicant amnesty in relation to this incident that happened on the 26th of February 1992.

Lastly I will refer the Committee to the incident hat happened on the 27th of March 1992, which involved the murdering of a traffic officer. In the evidence-in-chief and under cross-examination, the applicant stated that he gave instructions that the people who were actually responsible for that murder should go and get guns for the community of Polla Park.

The applicant acknowledged, and it has always been his evidence, that he did not personally execute this act. He however stated that the people who were responsible for this act were acting under his instructions. He stated that he was a leader in the area in which he was staying and these people were his followers. He at one stage or another told these people that they should avoid getting arrested at all costs, even if it means that they should kill in the process, or lose their lives in the process.

So the people who actually perpetrated this act were doing that under the direct instructions of the applicant as their leader. It is my submission that this act, this particular act also falls within the ambit of the Act and it was related to the political situation that was in the area at the time.

I therefore again indicate that, make a submission that the applicant actually made a full disclosure in regard to this incident, in that for the first time the names of the people who were actually responsible for this incident were actually put forward to the Honourable Committee. And it is my submission that ... ...(end of side A of tape) ... in regard to incident, on the basis that I've just stated.

I again wish to bring it to the attention of the Committee, that the applicant stated that he is sorry about the incident that took place and that he's sorry for the suffering that he caused to the families of the people that he killed and to the people that he injured. And that I request to Honourable Committee to take into account when considering the application of the applicant. That is all, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you, Mr Padi. Mr van der Heyde,

have you got any submissions?

MR VAN DER HEYDE IN ARGUMENT: I do, Mr Chairman, thank you.

I would like to start with the applications as you get them in the bundles. Now I'm just going to read Section 18 of the Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act. It says:

"Any person who wishes to apply for amnesty in respect of any act, omission or offence, on the grounds that it is an act associated with a political objective, shall within 12 months from the date of the Proclamation referred to in Section 7.3, or such extended period as my be prescribed, submit such an application to the Commission in the prescribed form."

Now that the forms that this Act is mentioning is Annexure Form 1.

Now to start with, nowhere in these forms does the applicant apply for amnesty for any of the attempted murders that happened on the 8th of September and later on when there was shot on the taxi and with the traffic officer, nor was there an application for the illegal possession of a firearm or the illegal possession of AK47 ammunition. So I take it then that that person did not apply for amnesty in such a way.

Then when I get to the three forms I have difficulty to understand for which acts the applicant himself did apply for amnesty. As far as I was concerned, he applied for amnesty for three acts, that was the stadium murder, it was the murder on the taxi, on the people in the taxi and then - well, as well as on the traffic officer.

In the first two applications that he gave, nowhere does one find even an indication to these three acts that were committed. Different dates are being used and it's just being said in general that there was, that he had to defend him and his community against attacks of the IFP.

If we then look at the third application in itself, you will see that he only applied - well if you look at page 9, (a)(1), acts, omissions or offences for which he applies for amnesty:

16 IFP members murdered;

- 4 IFP members at old Vereeniging Road and;

- 1 traffic officer.

All of them were murdered. That is what he is applying for amnesty for. There's - as I said before, there is no attempt in here to apply for amnesty for the attempted murders and the possession of the illegal firearms.

I will go further now and discuss these three applications for amnesty, under full disclosure and political objective.

The first will be the stadium murder. As clearly came out during this hearing, it has been said that the people at the most had shields with them, some of them might have had sticks. I definitely cannot see how a group like this, who had no firearms or something like that, would go on a rally and then would go on a rampage and start killing people around them. There were not any weapons in the group, there were children in the group. I mean if there was going to be an attack of some sorts, really Mr Chairperson, there will not have been any children within the group.

I also want to refer again to the background information which Mr Duma Nkosi, where he has specifically said that there was a lull in the violence for about eight months before Mr Phama went on his shooting rampage.

To the political objective I also want to stand by Mr Duma Nkosi's statement and the TRC will be in a better position to judge. They have heard Mr Duma Nkosi's testimony before and they've now heard Mr Phama's testimony and they would be able to judge whose version is more likely to be correct.

ADV GCABASHE: No, just clarify that particular point. What's the Nkosi version that you're relying on?

MR VAN DER HEYDE: The Nkosi version is that that specific Self Defence Unit, of which Mr Phama belonged, was criminal of nature and there was a lull in the violence. I will show you that.

ADV GCABASHE: My difficulty is you're being very selective in quoting Mr Nkosi. That particular paragraph goes on to say - he speaks of Ceba and the activities of Ceba, but on page - well it's my page 18, it should be your page 18 as well, the paragraph after the lull paragraph. If you go to your lull paragraph, yes? At the end of that he says

"SDU member, Michael Phama, is currently serving several life sentences for this incident."

"SDU member", not aberrant group or Ceba group, he says: "SDU member, Michael Phama ..."

You've got that bit?

MR VAN DER HEYDE: I do have the bit.

MACHINE SWITCHED OFF

ADV GCABASHE: I actually just had a quick look at this again. You also have references in these documents that you referred to as

"Mr Michael Phama, an ANC member"

There's no dispute in the documentation before you that Michael Phama is an ANC member.

MR VAN DER HEYDE: I never said that there was a dispute that he is an ANC member.

ADV GCABASHE: You are saying in the same breath that he was part of this criminal element that got involved in these criminal activities. There is no clear link in the documents before us, that indeed he was involved in criminal activities as directed by Ceba. What we do have from his evidence, Mr Phama's evidence, is that at some stage or the other Ceba was one of their commanders, but the activities that we are dealing with at this hearing were directed by a different leader, Mbatane. Yes, you're with me?

MR VAN DER HEYDE: I am with you.

ADV GCABASHE: Do you understand my difficulty in the link that you are drawing, that I actually can't find.

MR VAN DER HEYDE: I understand your difficulty, Honourable Chairperson, but you must also remember that Mr Phama himself said earlier today that there was only one SDU in Polla Park and that that SDU was at a certain run by Mr Ceba. And of course Mr Duma Nkosi speaks of this specific SDU that was criminal of nature.

ADV GCABASHE: Yes, this is my difficulty with your proposition. The one isn't necessarily linked to the other. When you talk of Ceba and his criminal activities you are not necessarily - you cannot deduct that all of those activities involved this particular person, the criminal activities. You can just as easily make the inference that the activities this particular applicant was involved with, were kosher SDU activities. Whether they were at the time of Ceba or at the time of Mbatane is not really the issue, we're really dealing with linking him to Ceba and those criminal activities that are referred to in that document.

MR VAN DER HEYDE: I can just remind you, Mr Chairperson, that during cross-examination I have asked Mr Phama, firstly, if he knew Mr Ceba, he said he knew him and then I asked him if he was part of the SDU to which Mr Ceba belonged and he acknowledged that.

MACHINE SWITCHED OFF

MR VAN DER HEYDE: I then want to go to the taxi incident. It was evident that Mr Phama did not really exactly know who the occupants of the taxi was, he didn't know whether the belonged to any political party. According to me, I submit that he did not even know that that was the specific taxi that he was supposed to shoot upon. He only identified it by the colour, which was off-white, which I assume is very, that you get a lot of taxis of that colour.

The political objective, I asked him the specific question if he knew what the political nature of the people, the occupants of the taxi was and he specifically said he did not know.

Honourable Chairperson, that submits my application. According to me it's straightforward, he didn't apply for amnesty on any of the attempted murders, the political objective of the taxi is not being applied to and then, as well as the full disclosure that he made in the stadium murder. It came out that there was not really any danger of a form of attack that he was speaking about. He applied for amnesty because he had to defend himself. And according to me this person does not deserve to get any amnesty. Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr van der Heyde. Ms van der Westhuizen, have you got any submissions?

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Just in short. I do not intend duplicating anything that my learned colleague has submitted in his argument. I wish to in short, deal with the three application forms filled in by Mr Phama. In short then, the first and second form, the dates or the incidents for which he's applying for amnesty in these two forms, are basically the same as in Form 1, the dates of the incidents he's applying for is the 18/7/1990, the 21/8/1990, the 22/8/1990 and then 11/12, and it appears to be also 1990. The same dates appear, although the years are not on that form, appear in his second form.

These two forms, the information they're supplying is basically the same. He's not specifically referring to any of the three acts for which he is before this Committee today. What is also noteworthy in the first two forms, he specifically says that he wasn't commanded or ordered by anybody to commit any of the acts. When one then looks at the last form that was filled in by Mr Phama, it ...(intervention)

ADV GCABASHE: Just before you get to that one, Ms van der Westhuizen, you will agree ...(no sound) as indicated by Adv Steenkamp, the reason we are not able to properly deal with the 18th, 21st, 27th, 22nd and 11 dates, is because the victims in relation to those particular incidents have not been notified. And even though this applicant has applied for amnesty in respect of those incidents, we can't properly deal with it, because technically we must notify the victims, yes?

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Yes, I absolutely agree with you, all I'm trying to indicate is that in the first two forms he didn't deal with the specific incidents for which he is before this Committee. I can't comment further on how it should be dealt with.

ADV GCABASHE: No, no, no, that's not what I wanted to comment on, on how it should be dealt with, I'm just trying to remind you that those are incidents we are actually going to get to at some point or the other, because they have not been properly dealt with yet. Had the TRC notified these people, we would be dealing with those particular incidents as well because he has sought amnesty for that.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: No, I'm actually in agreement with you, Honourable Member.

ADV GCABASHE: The second point, you will recall that he did say that he can't read or write and that he was assisted by his co-prisoners in completing these forms. And that is a factor I'm sure you will say, we should take into account in looking at all of these forms as application forms submitted by this applicant.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: That is indeed so. I actually, when I questioned him, also said that I do take that into account. Just to end off, the first two forms didn't say that he was given any order or that he had any commander. The last one that was submitted by this applicant is in fact, is dealing with what we are here for before this Amnesty Committee. It deals with all three incidents.

Now the applicant said that the way this form was filled in, he gave information to somebody, he cannot remember who this person was who completed this form on his behalf, but the fact remains that the information contained in here must have come from somewhere. What is quite noteworthy is that the applicant is quite selective in what he decides he wants to adapt as his and what not and I would like to refer to the one aspect relating to whether this applicant knew that there was a rally.

There is specifically mention is made in this form, that - or from this form one can deduct that he knew that it was an IFP rally. The same can be deducted from the confession that he made. He testifying that he thought that it was, or he received word that it was in fact an attack, the people were coming to Polla Park to attack.

I would submit that this can just not be believed, seen also against the background of this whole matter. Here we can also look at the submissions made by his own political party, in which there's also mention made of a rally being held. The fact that all the people who went to attack, went specifically to the area of the stadium is a further indication of that.

And then I'd just like to go onto the taxi incident. As my learned colleague had already stated, this applicant said that he didn't know who the occupants were, the reason why he fired was because somebody, or people from Polla Park had already started to fire from the Angus Station onto the taxi that was passing.

In this regard I'd like to refer you to the witness who testified, who was a passenger inside the taxi. He also in his evidence said that he did not know where this taxi was coming from, although his legal representative argued that is was coming from the hostel. The applicant himself did not know that.

And then I'd like to further submit that the only reason why this applicant is saying before this Commission that he didn't know that it was a rally, is to tie in with his version that he was defending either himself or the community. He had to say that to tie in with this so-called version of defence, or saying that he defended himself. The facts in fact indicate otherwise. I would also request, on the basis that he did not make disclosure, that his application be refused. Thank you.

ADV GCABASHE: Ms van der Westhuizen, before you close, you say it indicates otherwise, you know that he was indeed not protecting himself or his community. What otherwise, what was he doing there? Why was he there? What are you thoughts on that?

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Honourable Member, as stated to him - we stated to him that he just went there out of his own to attack the people, to commit a massacre. These people - we called a witness, Mr Mpanza, who in fact, I'll submit, was a very good witness, was on his way to the Tokoza stadium. And there is also - from the ANC submissions it is clear that they knew there was a rally taking place.

ADV GCABASHE: No, you see the ANC submission really was prepared after the facts, so if you are going to prepare a document after the facts, you'll know it was a rally. I don't think there's a dispute in terms of the factual situation, that it was indeed a rally. His perception is very different, but the factual situation, it would appear that it was indeed a peace rally organised by the IFP to try and build reconciliation with the community. But that is not his case, his case is that he subjectively thought otherwise because of the information he was given.

But put that aside, my question still is, if in fact as you are stating, he is wrong, he was not there to look after his community in any way at all, I still don't quite get your argument. What then put him there, why would he be there? Even if he was there to just massacre the people and I suppose you mean massacre his political opponents. Is there no political objective in that?

You know that's what I want you to address me on. Isn't that in any event, on your version, an act within the context of the political struggles of the times an act with some kind of political objective? It's not his version, it's your client's version.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: What I'm saying, Honourable Member, should he have thought that these were - first of all, one should keep in mind that these people, it wasn't only, strictly people coming from the hostel, although he might have thought so, there were also people coming from the community.

It seems as if he said he just fired at random because he believed they were IFP people coming from the hostel. I will agree if in his mind he was absolutely convinced these were IFP people, only IFP people, coming to attack Polla Park, of course then that will give him some political objective.

What I'm saying is that he did not make a full disclosure, he's not telling the truth as to the facts of what happened there and therefore his application should be denied.

ADV GCABASHE: And you are saying the basis for your proposition is that he knew it was a rally? Is this really the central point, he knew it was a rally, a peace rally at that, and it's because of that knowledge that you are saying he is not making a full disclosure?

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: That is indeed so, Honourable Member.

ADV GCABASHE: Any other fact, is that the only one, or anything else to support that? That's one fact, any other to support your full disclosure or your non-full disclosure argument?

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Honourable Member, I'm just reminded by my colleague, there's also the witnesses, the one witness who testified, and other evidence that there was in fact a peaceful period preceding that specific rally which took place.

ADV GCABASHE: Yes, you see my difficulty again with that is, "a lull" doesn't mean it had ceased completely, violence has ceased, a lull means that there was relative quiet and relative quiet and relative quiet doesn't tell us how many attacks there may have been between January and September. And I'm not in the guessing game, so a lull I'll take as a lull, not as a total cessation of hostilities, but as a relatively quiet period, on the documentation that we have.

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: Thank you. I can't take it much further, thank you.

ADV GCABASHE: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Adv Steenkamp?

ADV STEENKAMP: Nothing, Mr Chairman.

NO ARGUMENT BY ADV STEENKAMP

CHAIRPERSON: Have you got any reply, Mr Padi?

MR PADI IN REPLY: Yes, Mr Chairman.

I would like to address the Committee on the aspects that were brought forward by my learned colleague, that the applicant did not apply for amnesty for attempted murders and for possession of arms and ammunition.

I'd like to again draw the attention of the Committee to the fact that these forms were not actually completed by the applicant himself, he did that with the help of some other people. What he did was to relate his story to those people and those people put what he was saying down in writing.

The first two applications forms he says he was assisted by his co-prisoners. It is not clear before the Commission, whether the people who were filling in these applications, who were helping Mr Phama to fill in these applications, did really have knowledge that Mr Phama was actually convicted for the possession the arms and ammunition and for the attempted murders per se. But Mr Phama actually, according to his evidence, did tell those people the whole incident that took place and he took it that those people would actually put down exactly what was required in terms of these documents, as they were people who were more knowledgeable than him.

So I again request the Honourable Committee to take that into account, that when Mr Phama made an application, especially the third one which refers to these particular incidents that took place on these dates, that his intention was that all the offences that formed part of the incident that took place, should form part of his amnesty application.

The same goes with the incident of the 28th of February and the one that happened subsequently to that, all the applications that are before the Committee. So ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: So it's for his participation in these incidents that are before us? That is what he is applying for, for what he had done during these three incidents that we are seized with here?

MR PADI: That is correct, Honourable Chair. In addition to that he applies to all the other criminal offences that are linked to the acts that he was involved in.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I mean he's not a lawyer, he's a lay person, he says "look, I went on orders to this Khumalo Street incident and I shot people there, that's what I did. I want amnesty for what I have done".

MR PADI: That's exactly what I am saying, Chairperson.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, and that you say, but look you know, he really just wants amnesty for the murders, he's prepared to accept that he doesn't want amnesty for the attempted murders. It doesn't make sense to me.

MR PADI: That is my submission. Thank you, that is all that I'd like to address this Committee on.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you. That concludes the proceedings in regard to this application. The Panel would need time to consider the matter and to formulate a decision and that decision, once it is available, would be communicated to all of the parties with an interest in the matter. We will in the circumstances then reserve the decision and notify once that is available.

It just remains for us to thank the legal representatives for their assistance in this matter, we're indebted to you, thank you.

ADV STEENKAMP: As you wish, Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman, that will conclude this specific application. I have tried to ensure that we can probably proceed with the next applicant, but I am however informed that the next applicant will be Mr Mnguni. He was here since yesterday because for logistical reasons I decided to keep him here. He is actually here today. The person who will be appearing on his behalf will be Ms van der Westhuizen. I can't speak on her behalf, but I understand she still needs to consult with the applicant. There's also the question of victims who are still here, Mr Chairman.

In the circumstances, only from my point of view, Mr Chairman, I would since, as far as I can see, no time will actually be lost, or any time will be made available for people to consult and give us some time to prepare the rest of the hearing. We still I think, have four or five applicants left and there will be a possibility that certain victims will have to be called. So in the circumstances I would suggest, Mr Chairman, with all due respect, that for today unfortunately there's no specific application which we can proceed with. Those are the facts at my disposal now, Mr Chairman. Thank you, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. You indeed represent Mr Mnguni?

MS VAN DER WESTHUIZEN: That is so, Mr Chairperson. I've only received the documentation this morning. I would like to consult with him properly, but I should be in a position to continue tomorrow morning.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Well under those circumstances we are unable to proceed with the particular application. The applicant is entitled to not only legal representation, but a legal representative who is properly prepared for the matter. Hopefully the time that will be invested in preparing might pay dividends in limiting the time that we eventually spend in hearing the matter.

So under those circumstances we are going to adjourn our proceedings today and we will reconvene tomorrow in this venue when we will hear the amnesty application of Mr Mnguni, at 9 o'clock. So we are adjourned until tomorrow morning at nine.

ADV STEENKAMP: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS