Amnesty Hearings

TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION

AMNESTY HEARINGS

MR T V MATSEPE: Thank you Mr Chairman. For the purposesof the record I introduce myself, T V Matsepe of the same firmT V Matsepe and Company practising at Odendaalsrus. Mr ChairmanI just want to point out from the onset that I shall lead, indeedstart leading the evidence of Petros, but must also point outto the Committee that I have instructions to appear on behalfof five applicants. For the purposes of the convenience of thedeliberations I have opted to lead the evidence of all the fiveapplicants that I am appearing on behalf of, and then later onlead the evidence of any further witnesses which we might deemnecessary. The reason for this Mr Chairman is that the circumstancessurrounding the incidents relating to these applications are allto a great extent similar, and in that way we hope that we shallbe sparing a lot of time for the Commission.

Before I continue I would just like to confirm Mr Roland, MrChairman I am led to believe that before I lead the evidence ofthe first applicant Roland Petros it would be necessary for himto take the oath.

ROLAND PETROS: (sworn states)

MR T V MATSEPE: Roland I would like you to feel completelyat ease. Is that in order?

MR PETROS: Yes.

MR T V MATSEPE: Before we start with your evidence Iwould like to know from you do you realise what the nature oftoday's proceedings is?

MR PETROS: Yes I understand it.

MR T V MATSEPE: Do you also understand that this is nota court case in the sense that you are being tried, do you understandthat? Do you realise that this is not a trial in the sense thatyou are not standing there as an accused in a trial?

MR PETROS: Yes I understand that.

MR T V MATSEPE: Do you also realise that you must bevery open with this Committee, for instance if you had appearedin court in a case arising from the same incident, you must justrealise that today's proceedings demands of you that you makea full disclosure of the facts?

MR PETROS: Yes I understand.

MR T V MATSEPE: In other words you must not conceal orhide anything from the Commission.

MR PETROS: Yes, no, absolutely.

MR T V MATSEPE: Firstly I would like you to tell theCommission where you were born and when you were born.

You may continue, where were you born?

MR PETROS: I was born in Johannesburg, El dorado Park,in 28 Sand Street, 1969. I then moved to Ennerdale to CancerStreet, Ennerdale.

MR T V MATSEPE: You see there are people here in theaudience who would also like to hear what you have to say. Theyare very interested in your evidence and therefore I would liketo ask you could you please speak a little bit louder.

MR PETROS: Right.

MR T V MATSEPE: Please explain to the committee whatyour links are with Kroonstad.

MR PETROS: My father was born in Kroonstad, Mr PhilipPetros, and his entire family also born here, the entire Petrosfamily. I spent most of my early years in Kroonstad with membersof the Petros family. So a large part of my life I spent in Kroonstadrather in Johannesburg where I'd been born. It's a very largefamily the Petros family.

MR T V MATSEPE: Now did you visit Kroonstad regularlyduring the period in which this incident took place?

MR PETROS: Yes, frequently, and also before the incidenttook place I visited Kroonstad regularly. I spent the majorityof my time here rather than in Johannesburg where I was born.

MR T V MATSEPE: Ja, could you just explain why that isso? Seeing that you were born in Johannesburg and your parentslived there why did you spend such a large part of your time inKroonstad?

MR PETROS: Well the reason for that is because I wasinvolved in the ANC Youth League in Kroonstad and that's why Ispent a lot of time here.

MR T V MATSEPE: Were you a member of the ANC Youth League?

MR PETROS: Yes.

MR T V MATSEPE: What time were you a member of the ANCYouth League, even if you can just give us an approximate time,even if it's not a specific date?

MR PETROS: From approximately 1980, I can't rememberexactly.

MR T V MATSEPE: Were you involved in the activities ofthe Youth League during 1991 and 1992?

MR PETROS: Yes in some cases.

MR T V MATSEPE: Ja you were convicted in a matter arisingfrom the murder of George Ramasimong whose nickname was "Diwiti".

MR PETROS: That's correct.

MR T V MATSEPE: And you were sentenced for this murder?

MR PETROS: That is correct.

MR T V MATSEPE: I would like you to explain to the committeewhat you knew of this particular person before we get to the actualevent, what do you know about the deceased, how did you get toknow him?

MR PETROS: I met the deceased in the community as a callous,cruel, merciless person, who terrorised the community day in andday out.

MR T V MATSEPE: And how did you become aware of this?

MR PETROS: Well that was because of my involvement withthe ANC Youth League, and because I was often with Senator Bloemin his company.

MR T V MATSEPE: Now could you explain to the Committeewho Senator Bloem was at that stage?

MR PETROS: Senator Bloem is one of my cousins, actuallymy father's cousin, in fact he's my uncle.

MR T V MATSEPE: Yes well apart from that ...(intervention)

MR PETROS: Excuse me.

MR T V MATSEPE: Is there a family connection betweenthe two of you? Is there a family connection between yourselfand Senator Bloem?

MR PETROS: Yes that's correct.

MR T V MATSEPE: Did he hold office within the ANC structureat the time?

MR PETROS: Yes. He was the leader of the ANC in theMaokeng branch.

MR T V MATSEPE: Were any of your family members harmedby either the Three Million Gang and/or George Ramasimong himself?

MR PETROS: I regard the whole community as my familyso the whole community have been terrorised by this person soI can say "yes" to that question.

MR T V MATSEPE: I know it that in the case you mentioneda certain person by the name of Philip, Philip Petros, do youknow him?

MR PETROS: Yes.

MR T V MATSEPE: Who is he?

MR PETROS: That's my father.

MR T V MATSEPE: Philip Petros is your father?

MR PETROS: Yes.

MR T V MATSEPE: No the person who had been killed - MrChairman if you would allow me. You mentioned a person who'dbeen killed who was a member of your family?

MR PETROS: That is Andrew Petros.

MR T V MATSEPE: You also mention a Simon Bloem here,could you tell us a little bit more about him?

MR PETROS: Well Simon Bloem was killed in a most brutalmanner on the 14th of February 1992.

MR T V MATSEPE: Do you know how he had been killed?

MR PETROS: No I don't know how he had been killed butI had heard that it happened at the taxi rank. He had been killedsomewhere there in cold blood by the Three Million gang.

MR T V MATSEPE: According to information which you hadobtained who was responsible for this murder?

MR PETROS: Yes I was worried ...(intervention)

MR T V MATSEPE: No, who had been responsible for themurder, according to what you had learnt?

MR PETROS: Diwiti and the Three Million gang.

MR T V MATSEPE: How had he been killed?

MR PETROS: He was killed in cold blood in a most cruelmanner.

MR T V MATSEPE: Well had he been shot or killed?

MR PETROS: He had been butchered, he had been stabbed,he had been torn apart if one could actually call it that.

MR T V MATSEPE: Right. Before this murder with whichwe are concerned with here had there been any meetings to talkabout this problem the problem presented by the gang?

MR PETROS: Yes, there had been many meetings regardingthis gang. Yes, there were many different meetings held to discussthe problem presented by this gang.

MR T V MATSEPE: Was a meeting held at which specificmention was made of the possibility of killing George Ramasimong?

MR PETROS: Yes such a meeting was held.

MR T V MATSEPE: Could you give us some more details regardingthis meeting, where was it held?

MR PETROS: It was held at Brent Park Stadium. I can'texactly remember who attended the meeting, everybody who attendedthe meeting, but in the meeting a request came from the communityto the self-protection unit to remove this George Ramasimong fromsociety because of the way he terrorised society in various cold-bloodedways.

MR T V MATSEPE: Right. Was it as a result of this meetingthat you acted in the way that you did?

MR PETROS: Yes, yes there was an order from the communityto remove this person and this order was given at this particularmeeting.

MR T V MATSEPE: What did you decide to do?

MR PETROS: The instruction wasn't aimed specificallyat myself, but specifically everybody, any member of the self-protectionunit who found this person could kill him.

MR T V MATSEPE: Your testimony is then that you weren'tspecifically approached and asked as an individual to kill thisperson?

MR PETROS: Yes.

MR T V MATSEPE: What appeared from the meeting was thatanybody who came into contact with this particular person couldkill him?

MR PETROS: Yes that is correct.

MR T V MATSEPE: Right, I'd like to get to the actualday of the incident. What happened, what did you do on the dayof this particular incident? Let me put it this way perhaps tokeep my questioning brief, do you confirm your explanation ofplea tendered in the Supreme Court when you pleaded guilty tothe murder?

MR PETROS: Yes that's correct.

MR T V MATSEPE: You then went to the taxi rank whereyou shot Diwiti dead?

MR PETROS: That's correct.

MR T V MATSEPE: After this person's death is that correct?

MR PETROS: Yes.

MR T V MATSEPE: At the start of the court proceedingsyou pleaded not guilty?

MR PETROS: That's correct.

MR T V MATSEPE: But later on you did plead guilty?

MR PETROS: Yes, that's correct.

MR T V MATSEPE: Could you explain to the Committee whyyou decided to change your plea to one of guilty?

MR PETROS: Initially they wanted me to plead guilty butthey wanted me to place all the blame on Senator Bloem so thathe could go to prison for the act which I had committed.

MR T V MATSEPE: I would just like to repeat my question,what I would like to know is initially you did not plead guilty?

MR PETROS: Yes.

MR T V MATSEPE: But later on you decided you were goingto change your plea, in other words you decided to admit thatyou had killed this person and that you had the intent to killhim?

MR PETROS: Yes I am sorry I misunderstood the question.

MR T V MATSEPE: Why the change of plea?

MR PETROS: Well I felt that I wanted to be entirely honestand truthful with the State.

MR T V MATSEPE: Do you know what happened after the deathof this person as regards the violence which took place in thevicinity, in the area?

MR PETROS: Peace had been restored to the communities,it did take a little bit of time however. From the time of hisdeath until this time there has been peace in our community, theentire community can confirm that.

MR T V MATSEPE: How do you feel about the fact that youcommitted this act? How do you feel about that right now?

MR PETROS: I feel very bad about it, I feel very sorryabout the fact that I committed this deed. I didn't want to commitit in the first place but because we had nobody else to protectus at that stage we had to protect ourselves and defend ourselves. This person should not have been dead today and I'm actuallyvery sorry that he is dead. But if the South African Police hadhelped us then this person would never have died. I am very sorrythat this person is dead because he was actually also an innocentperson who had been used by the SAP. For that reason I'd liketo say, perhaps if his mother and other members of his familyare present, I would like to say that I am very sorry and I'dlike to ask their forgiveness. I would want them to forgive meas God forgives us. I am sorry that I killed this person.

MR T V MATSEPE: In other words what you are telling theCommittee is that you are sorry that you had to be the personresponsible for executing the sentiments and demands of your society?

MR PETROS: Yes the instructions came from the communityitself and was directed at us because we protected and defendedthe community.

MR T V MATSEPE: You say that George Ramasimong was usedby the then South African Police?

MR PETROS: That is correct.

MR T V MATSEPE: Why do you say that?

MR PETROS: I killed this person and I got 14 years imprisonmentfor this deed but this same person killed 102 people and thereis proof of that. But this person didn't even receive 14 secondsof imprisonment for his deeds.

MR T V MATSEPE: If it pleases you Mr Chairman I am justgoing through. I still think that this question has not beenclearly answered, do you have any information, whether personallyor information that has been given to you that led to the conclusionthat the South African Police at the time were colluding and conspiringwith the Three Million gang.

MR PETROS: Yes, I am sorry I haven't yet fully answeredthe question. Evidence proves that this person was involved andcooperated with the South African Police in that he was neverarrested for any act committed by him. This person was transportedin SAP bakkies and so on, and dropped off in various areas ofthe community to terrorise them and he was present when the SAPkilled certain members of the community. Further evidence alsoshows that this person was given bail for each and every act thathe committed.

MR T V MATSEPE: Do you have any information regardingthe relationship between George Ramasimong and the then Prosecutor,Miss Pienaar, or Mrs Pienaar?

MR PETROS: There was a time when we were looking forthis person to remove him from society and as a result of thathe received certain information and went and hid himself at MrsPienaar's home. As a result of this we knew that this personcolluded with the South African Police, because this person wentinto hiding at that particular place for his own safety and wecouldn't understand why he couldn't be kept in safe detentionat the police station.

MR T V MATSEPE: Do you also have information that MrsPienaar had confirmed this, in other words that the Prosecutorhad confirmed this fact and she did not deny that Ramasimong hadcome to her house to hide?

MR PETROS: Yes she admitted that and confirmed that. She confirmed that she had done that and we have evidence tothat effect.

MR T V MATSEPE: Now these things, for instance the factthat there were allegations that police were conspiring with thegang, allegations that the police, that the leader of the gangsometimes went to sleep over at the home of the Prosecutor, whatfeelings did this evoke from yourself and the community? Yousee now you were given the information and you heard the allegationsregarding police conspiracy, allegations were made about the factthat certain people were charged but soon let out on bail andthere were allegations that the leader of the gang sought safetyat the Prosecutor's home and stayed there for a while, now inthe light of all this information which you had, how did you feel? What I would like to establish, and what I'd like you to explainto the Committee is after you saw these things happening or heardthat these things were happening, how did you feel, did you feelsafe and secure or did you feel threatened and afraid? What wenton in your mind at that time?

MR PETROS: At that stage we felt that we are not safe.We felt that there was nobody to defend us and to protect us. We felt that there was no justice for us.

MR T V MATSEPE: Did you have any faith and confidencein the police?

MR PETROS: No, none at all, I had no confidence in theprevious dispensation and system.

MR T V MATSEPE: Did you have any faith in the court procedure,did you feel that you could go to court and complain?

MR PETROS: No, I trusted nobody. I trust nobody fromthe South African Police or any magistrate, State prosecutor becauseall these people seemed to collude with this "Diwiti"this deceased. So at that stage I didn't trust anybody.

MR T V MATSEPE: So you are saying that you had not faithin the legal system under the police and it is therefore underthose circumstances that you took the decision to do what youin fact did?

MR PETROS: It wasn't my decision, it was the community'sdecision in relation to the self-protection unit, because I wasthe person who found the deceased first I was the person who performedthis act.

QUESTION: Yes Mr Chairman I do have questions, thankyou. Mr Petros you testified about the relationship between yourselfand Senator Bloem, do you remember that? Sorry? You testifiedabout you relationship with Senator Bloem?

MR PETROS: Yes.

QUESTION: Now I just want to know from you, how oftenwere you with Senator Bloem?

MR PETROS: I was often with Senator Bloem, on and off. Most of the time I drove the car and he was a passenger in thecar with me.

QUESTION: You testified that you were a member of theANC Youth, was he a leader or a combat in the ANC Youth League?

MR PETROS: He was a leader of ANC as well, actually howcan I say, was involved in the activities of the ANC as well aswith the community. He was involved in the activities of theANC Youth League as well with the community. So I cannot explainto you was he a member of the Youth League, I can say yes he was,I can say no but you could say he was a member.

QUESTION: Sorry Mr Petros you are by the way entitledto put on the earphones to get the Afrikaans translation.

MR PETROS: Oh sure, sure.

QUESTION: Did the ANC Youth League not have it's leader?

MR PETROS: The ANC Youth did have its own leader, namelyPetros Machaba Ntulu.

QUESTION: Now between Petros Machaba Ntulu and SenatorBloem to whom were you closely related, politically?

MR PETROS: Both of them.

QUESTION: Would you take an instruction from SenatorBloem, political instruction?

MR PETROS: Yes.

QUESTION: Would you equally take a political instructionfrom Ntulu Machaba?

MR PETROS: Yes.

QUESTION: Now for how long were you a member of the ANCYouth League before the date of committing this crime?

MR PETROS: I joined in 1989 as a card-carrying member,but before that I had been involved in the ANC activities forquite a long time, youth activities. I grew up in ANC circlesand I was well acquainted with the activities. In other wordsbefore I joined in 1989 as a card-carrying member, even beforethat I had been involved in their youth activities.

QUESTION: You are responding to my question I get theimpression that you were at a certain stage an honourary sympathiserof the ANC and later on you became a member, am I correct?

MR PETROS: That's correct.

QUESTION: What I want to know from you, for how longwere you a member of the ANC, before the commission of this crime,actual member?

MR PETROS: Since 1989.

QUESTION: You testified that an instruction was givenat the meeting that was held that the deceased is to be removedor perhaps to be eliminated?

MR PETROS: That's correct.

QUESTION: Now who gave that instruction or that command?

MR PETROS: I can't remember exactly who gave the instructionbut what I can remember is that the instruction came from thecommunity at large.

QUESTION: Mr Petros is it really possible that the wholecommunity gathered at a stadium or any other venue to give instructionsto other members of the community, was there no leader, a chairmanof that nature?

MR PETROS: It had been reported to us that there wasa certain specific person but I can't remember his name.

QUESTION: It was in any case a formal ANC meeting notso?

MR PETROS: yes.

QUESTION: Now who was chairing that meeting?

MR PETROS: I can't remember exactly.

QUESTION: Who opened the meeting?

MR PETROS: I think, if I remember correctly, one Biza.

QUESTION: Biza who?

MR PETROS: At that stage we just used code names so Iknew most of the members just by their code names.

QUESTION: So Biza was his code name?

MR PETROS: Yes that was his code name.

QUESTION: I am going to refer you to your supplementaryaffidavit, I know you don't have it but I'll read to you whatyou said and ask a question therefrom. Members of the Committeethat will be on page 3 of the handwritten supplementary affidavit,that will be page 27 according to indexing, page 27 the thirdparagraph. I will read this out to you because you don't haveit. You stated that,

"The gang ultimately took on a political character as wasevidenced by a submission made by the leader of the gang nameDiwiti George Ramasimong who was a complainant in a case heldat Kroonstad, when he admitted....."

now this is where my question comes,

"....when he admitted under cross-examination that he andthe gang had become members of the IFP in 1990 and that he hadinstructions to oppose the ANC".

Do you remember you said that in your affidavit?

MR PETROS: I can't remember that very well because itwas a long time ago and at that stage my life was very confused.

QUESTION: If you wish I can let the affidavit be shownto you so that you recollect what you said. With the Chairman'sindulgence.

QUESTION: I want to know is it himself that confessesthis?

QUESTION: Ja, according to that statement you said hesaid that in court, in the case wherein he was a complainant. This was the affidavit that was taken from you not very longago by your legal representative on a Saturday this year.

MR PETROS: Oh yes, yes I was a bit confused, I beg yourpardon. I was a bit confused. That is correct, yes.

QUESTION: Did you yourself have any information as towhat the accused said to the Court, his connection with the IFP?

MR PETROS: We did not believe that this person was amember of the IFP I think he just wanted to hide behind the IFPbut as far as I am concerned he did say that, that he had beenappointed by the IFP to crush all opposition.

QUESTION: Did he perhaps tell you further or did youknow as to who actually made them, the deceased and the gang,to oppose the ANC?

MR PETROS: No, no, I don't know who gave them those instructionsbut I do know of what you have just mentioned. I don't know whogave them those instructions, but I do know that they were givensuch instructions or that he'd said that he was so instructed.

QUESTION: Let's go back again to the issue of, the issuewhere the meeting was held, where you testified that "I wasrequested by the community to kill the deceased". I stillhave a bit of a problem there as to how was this order, if itwas an order or an instruction given.

MR PETROS: The order was given by means of a messagefrom an informer. (The Interpreter requested the witness to pleasespeak up it is difficult to interpret).

QUESTION: The order was given by an informer, is thatwhat you are saying? Who gave the order or instruction that thedeceased, Diwiti should be eliminated or killed?

MR PETROS: As I said the community came to this conclusionitself and they decided to request us and the self-defence unitto eliminate this person and to remove him from society. We asthe self-protection unit were told by an informer that the communityhad taken this decision.

QUESTION: Was SDU or wing or part of the ANC Youth League?

MR PETROS: Yes it was the self-defence unit.

QUESTION: Now was this meeting, was it a meeting of theANC Youth League or was it a meeting of the SDU's?

MR PETROS: It was a meeting of the SDU.

QUESTION: How many members of SDU were at that meeting?

MR PETROS: I can't remember exactly.

QUESTION: Mr Petros I want you to - sorry to interruptyou, what meeting are you referring to I just want to satisfymyself we are talking about one and the same meeting here? Whatmeeting are you referring to Mr Petros?

MR PETROS: Sir may I ask which particular meeting itis that you want to know about. I just recall one meeting thatwe had, I can just recall one meeting in connection with this.

QUESTION: The meeting is the meeting whereat a decisionwas taken that Diwiti must be killed, where you testified that,"I had been requested by the community".

MR PETROS: Yes it is the same meeting that I am referringto.

QUESTION: Now whose meeting was this?

MR PETROS: It was a meeting of the self-defence unit.

QUESTION: It was not a meeting of the community as awhole?

MR PETROS: No.

QUESTION: Now when you say it was not a meeting of thecommunity as a whole which part of the community was attendingthe meeting?

MR PETROS: Earlier that afternoon there had been a meetingattended by the whole community, but as a result of feedback fromthat meeting this person was sent to us after we had had our meetingat a later stage, and this person was sent to us with the messagefrom the community's meeting which had taken place earlier thatday. I can't remember whether it was on the same day or the previousday.

QUESTION: Mr Petros are you saying now on this particularday there were two separate meetings, one of the community andlater of the SDU's?

MR PETROS: No, no I am not saying it's on the same daythat this took place, I am saying that I am not sure whether itwas the previous day that the community meeting took place oron the same day as our self-defence meeting.

QUESTION: Did you attend the meeting of the community?

MR PETROS: No.

QUESTION: Did anything that was discussed in the meetingof the community was it ever taken over to the meeting of theSDU's.

MR PETROS: Yes.

QUESTION: Now who took that which came from the committeeto the SDU's, who made a report to you?

MR PETROS: I can't remember exactly who brought thisinstruction to us. I think I arrived at the meeting five minuteslate. The meeting had already started.

QUESTION: If you could speak a little bit louder, wehave got a problem with hearing.

MR PETROS: I say I cannot remember who brought us theparticular instruction to our meeting because I arrived a bitlate at the meeting and the time that I arrived there the meetingwas already under way.

QUESTION: But did you hear what was said in the SDU meetingfrom the community meeting, did you hear everything?

MR PETROS: Yes. That the community was requesting usas self-defence unit to eliminate this person.

QUESTION: Now where did you get the firearm from, theone which you used in killing Diwiti?

MR PETROS: I got the firearm from Sergeant Jacobs. SergeantJacobs, I think he was stationed at Langlaagte Police Station. I obtained the firearm from him to complete my shooting lessonswhich (Side A of tape 1 ends). ...training.

QUESTION: You had dealings with the police yourself?

MR PETROS: No. This person loaned me the firearm. Atthat stage I was struggling to get my firearm licence so the firearmis given to me so that I could complete my training in order toobtain the licence.

QUESTION: Is there any relationship between yourselfand this policeman who gave you the firearm?

MR PETROS: No, no there was no relationship between thetwo of us. We just attended the same church at some stage andI know that he was a good person. At the stage when he gave methe firearm he did not know anything about the act which I wasplanning to commit with the firearm.

QUESTION: But you've testified Mr Petros that you hadno confidence in the police because the police were assistingthe Three Million gang, how do you explain your getting a firearmfrom the very police you don't have confidence in?

MR PETROS: This person lives in Johannesburg and he wasnot aware of circumstances in Kroonstad at that stage.

QUESTION: Am I right then to understand you to be sayingthat when you say you do not have confidence in the police youare referring in particular to the Kroonstad police only?

MR PETROS: Yes that is entirely correct.

QUESTION: In your evidence when led you simply statedthat you killed the deceased at a taxi rank, could you tell usin detail how you did this, how you planned this, let us knowexactly what happened?

MR PETROS: I walked up to this person, this person GeorgeRamasimong was with his gang. I think there were about 12 or15 of them I can't remember exactly, because they knew me I worea balaclava so they wouldn't identify me because if they had identifiedme and recognised me they would have attacked me and not the otherway round, so I was wearing this balaclava to stop them from recognisingmy face. The person walked to the taxi rank and walked througha passage, a little gate there, entered through the gate to thetaxi rank. I was walking in amongst the members of the ThreeMillion, I walked up to him, I took out the firearm, went up tohim and a couple of the gang members behind me shouted at him,he turned around, he looked in my direction, he saw me approachingwith a firearm and he tried to run away, I shot. various shotsat him and he ran round the combi's at the taxi rank and the fenceis quite high on the other side so he couldn't run away. So heactually cornered himself there, he turned around, he ran backtowards me, I ran towards him, I think I caused him to fall bykicking him on his chest, he tried to get up again whilst I wasstanding there, I knocked his feet out from under him so he felldown again, I then put my foot on his head and while he was lyingon the ground I shot him in the head. I turned around again,I was alone, there was nobody else there and I then went backto the car, I ran away in the direction of the car.

QUESTION: Mr Petros you have testified and you said youare sorry for what you have done, you asked for forgiveness.

MR PETROS: Yes.

QUESTION: In killing the deceased Diwiti do you thinkthat measure was justified to take human life?

MR PETROS: No it was not justified.

QUESTION: Do you then agree with me that taking the circumstancesthat prevailed there, between yourself, that is your group andthe Three Million gang you went overboard by killing the deceased?

MR PETROS: I never wanted to kill this man. It was neverour plan to kill him but we had no choice but to kill him becausethere was nobody who could protect us, nobody who could complainabout this man and to seek help against all his actions.

QUESTION: No Mr Petros after killing this man was thereany political change in the area?

MR PETROS: Since this man died, up until today, but notimmediately, I think it took a couple of months after his death,but up until today there's been a change in our society, thereis peace and stability. The community is here to verify that,what I have just said now.

QUESTION: Thank you Mr Chairman. Petros I think thereis something that I think you must give a little bit more clarityto. Now I think you need to just clarify something for us, Iwill try and lead you, this meeting to which we have now referredto at such a meeting could you perhaps tell us how this particularkind of meeting proceeds? In other words is it a very formalkind of meeting or does it take place very informally?

MR PETROS: It took place in a very informal way becauseat that stage it was easier for our enemies to kill us when wewere all gathered together like that so the meetings were veryinformal.

QUESTION: Is it so that there was a secretary that tookdown the minutes?

MR PETROS: No, that did not happen.

QUESTION: And when people were given opportunities toask questions how did they do that? At these meetings when peoplewanted to make some kind of contribution or input or ask questionshow was it done, how did it happen?

MR PETROS: He simply voiced his opinion and then we sawwhat kind of feedback we could give him.

QUESTION: In other words a person could simply get upat the meeting and simply state what he had to say, he could simplysay no we can't continue with this, he must be killed, any individualcould do that?

MR PETROS: Yes that's correct.

QUESTION: How do you think - in other words support thatposition?

MR PETROS: Everybody supported the same point of viewso all the people at the meeting were in favour of this view.

QUESTION: How do you come to the conclusion that thatview was the general attitude and view of the people at the meeting,how did you become aware of that?

MR PETROS: Could you repeat that?

QUESTION: How would you at such a meeting, how wouldyou be able to determine that a view voiced by any particularperson was the view of the entire meeting? How could you be surethat an individual's view had the support of the entire meeting?

MR PETROS: The command was directed at all of us.

QUESTION: So it wasn't for instance the chairperson whowould say that this is the proposal and that's what we must do?

MR PETROS: No, no, that's not how it happened. It wasn'tformal in a sense of a motion tabled and that a voting had totake place. That did not take place.

QUESTION: In other words what you would like to tellus is that a view held by a particular person at the meeting,you all then had to agree with it, whether you actually agreedor not?

MR PETROS: No the view was then negotiated and talkedabout until everybody understood it.

QUESTION: Mr Petros I would like to clear up a few thingsin your evidence. You remember you filled in an application foramnesty?

MR PETROS: That is correct.

QUESTION: And you were asked in that form what crimeyou were seeking amnesty for, do you remember? You were asked...(intervention)

MR PETROS: That's correct.

QUESTION: And you were asked about your justificationsfor the act.

MR PETROS: That's correct.

QUESTION: And you were asked also, and I read from question11A,

"Was the act or offence committed in the execution of anorder or of or on behalf of or with the approval of the organisationconcerned".

And you said,

"Yes it was by the organisation African National Congress".

And you were then asked,

"If so state particulars of such order and the date thereofif known and the name and address of such person who gave suchorder or approval".

Do you remember you were asked that question?

MR PETROS: That's correct.

QUESTION: "Answer", that is the person whogave such order or approval you wrote down "Mr Dennis VictorBloem, Brentpark, Kroonstad".

MR PETROS: That's correct.

QUESTION: Did he give you the order?

MR PETROS: No.

QUESTION: Why did you put false information on your applicationform?

MR PETROS: I did not say that - I put down the name ofthat person as the person who also was aware of what had happened. I did not thereby indicate that he had given me the order.

QUESTION: The question that you answered was the personwho gave such order or approval, not anybody who was aware ofit, but that is your explanation is it?

MR PETROS: Pardon?

QUESTION: That is your explanation you don't want togive any other?

MR PETROS: Yes.

QUESTION: Right. Now you now talked about this meetingof the self- where you were told at the meeting of the self-defenceunit to remove the deceased, when was that meeting?

MR PETROS: If I remember correctly the meeting took placeon a Sunday the 23rd of February 1992.

QUESTION: And that was when the instruction was giventhat he must be removed?

MR PETROS: Pardon?

QUESTION: That is when he was given, you were given theinstruction to remove him, on Sunday 23rd of February, two daysbefore he was killed?

MR PETROS: That's correct.

QUESTION: Yes. Now reverting to why you mistrusted theorganisation you said that on one occasion the deceased went andstayed with a Mrs Pienaar, the Prosecutor?

MR PETROS: Yes.

QUESTION: When was that?

MR PETROS: I can't remember exactly, but I think it wasduring 1990, if I remember correctly.

QUESTION: 1990?

MR PETROS: Yes 1990 or 1991, it happened on various occasions,it didn't only happen once, it happened several times, he wentthere quite often to Mrs Pienaar's home so I can't remember anexact date.

QUESTION: You said, "there was a time when we werelooking for the deceased to remove him and he received informationand went and stayed with Mrs Pienaar", do you remember tellingus that in your evidence?

MR PETROS: Yes.

QUESTION: So you were trying to remove the deceased in1990 or 1991?

MR PETROS: No, there was a time when a part of the self-defenceunit was looking for this person, not I personally. There wasa time when a section or some members of the self-defence unitwere looking for this person I think this was during 1991 or 1990,I can't remember exactly.

QUESTION: To remove him?

MR PETROS: Yes, that's correct.

QUESTION: I take it the statement you made, the supplementaryaffidavit you say you were somewhat confused, that was writtenby your attorney was it? You were shown it, remember?

MR PETROS: Yes, yes he just put it a little bit moreformally.

QUESTION: He wrote it though?

MR PETROS: Yes, that's correct.

QUESTION: Did you return the firearm to Sergeant Jacobsafter you had killed deceased?

MR PETROS: No. The State kept the firearm.

QUESTION: Oh they found it did they?

MR PETROS: Yes.

QUESTION: And you've told us how you went up to the deceased,he was with 12 to 15 members of his gang and you didn't want themto recognise you so you pulled a balaclava down over your head?

MR PETROS: That's correct.

QUESTION: Didn't you think that would look very suspicious?

MR PETROS: Yes it did look very suspicious but I can'tunderstand it how I actually managed to shoot him without hissupporters and gang members actually doing anything to me.

QUESTION: And after you shot him you told us you werealone there?

MR PETROS: Yes, just myself and the deceased at the taxirank.

QUESTION: What happened to the 12 to 15 gang memberswho were there?

MR PETROS: I really couldn't tell you, I think they ranaway perhaps to go and look for help.

QUESTION: What had you been doing that day before youshot the deceased?

MR PETROS: I can't remember exactly, I think I was justat home the whole morning.

QUESTION: The day before?

MR PETROS: On the previous day we went looking for thisperson to kill him.

QUESTION: That's on the Sunday, the day on which you...(intervention)

MR PETROS: That was a Monday.

QUESTION: The previous day?

MR PETROS: Ja, that was a Monday, ja.

QUESTION: Were you living in Kroonstad then?

MR PETROS: Yes.

QUESTION: How long had you been there?

MR PETROS: I had been in Kroonstad, well, I stayed inKroonstad during the week and on weekends I went to Johannesburg,so on the weekend before this I went to Ennerdale so I remainedbehind for two days in Ennerdale so I think it was about on theWednesday that I came from Ennerdale to Kroonstad.

QUESTION: So you made a statement at your trial in termsof section 112 of the Criminal Procedure Act, do you rememberthat?

MR PETROS: Yes.

QUESTION: In which you said,

"On Thursday the 20th of February I came to Brentpark,Kroonstad, to attend the funerals of two of my uncles, Simon Bloemand Abyssinia Buthelezi".

MR PETROS: That's correct.

QUESTION: "During the vigil I learnt that Simon Bloemhad been killed by members of the Three Million gang".

MR PETROS: Yes.

QUESTION: "I also learnt that certain other of myrelatives had been assaulted and raped by members of the ThreeMillion gang".

MR PETROS: That's correct.

QUESTION: "I was upset at hearing of these eventsand seeing the effect they were having on my relatives in Kroonstad...."

all this is what you learnt when you were at the vigil at thefuneral, but you tell us you had been living at Kroonstad thewhole time, how is it you hadn't heard of it before the funeral?

MR PETROS: That is correct. I had already heard allof this whilst I was still in Ennerdale but it was just that itwas far more emphasised at the funeral and the vigils.

QUESTION: Oh you heard it at Ennerdale?

MR PETROS: That's correct.

QUESTION: You then go on to say,

"I drank alcohol excessively over the weekend and on Mondaythe 24th as well as on the 25th of February".

MR PETROS: That's correct.

QUESTION: Is that true?

MR PETROS: That is true.

QUESTION: So you weren't hunting this man, you were drinkingalcohol to excess on those days.

MR PETROS: No. No, I was not abusing alcohol I used alcoholfor my nerves.

QUESTION: "You said I drank alcohol excessively",do you remember saying that?

MR PETROS: Yes but I can't remember exactly how muchbut I used alcohol to stabilise myself because I was looking fora person to kill him and it was him or me and that was the reasonwhy I used alcohol.

QUESTION: Because you went on to say,

"After 4pm on the 25th of February I was transported toKroonstad town in a motor vehicle driven by Daniel Hankan(?) toascertain the fares payable and the times at which taxis wouldbe available from Kroonstad to Ennerdale".

do you remember saying that?

MR PETROS: Yes that's correct.

QUESTION: So you went there to find out about catchinga taxi to Ennerdale.

"This was done at the behest of my uncle Dennis Bloem whois accused no.1 of this matter".

MR PETROS: That's correct.

QUESTION: And then you say, you went on to say that,

"After you alighted from the taxi you saw deceased".

MR PETROS: Not that I can recall, after I got out ofthe taxi?

QUESTION: Yes.

MR PETROS: From which taxi is this now?

QUESTION: Sorry, sorry, not taxi the vehicle, after yougot out the vehicle.

MR PETROS: Yes.

QUESTION: And Dennis Victor Bloem also made a statementdidn't he?

MR PETROS: I am listening, yes.

QUESTION: He told you to go home on the afternoon ofthe 25th of February.

MR PETROS: Yes.

QUESTION: And was very cross with you because you hadspent the money he had given you on drink. Do you remember that?

MR PETROS: Yes.

QUESTION: And he then sent you off to the taxi rank tofind out how much it cost to send you home.

MR PETROS: Yes.

QUESTION: And that's what you were doing at the taxirank.

MR PETROS: Yes.

QUESTION: Mr Petros you will remember from the beginningI told you that today is the day when you should play open cards?

MR PETROS: Yes.

QUESTION: Where I read you documents pertaining to theprevious file and where at the time you did not tell the truth,what you said was not the truth, and if you still feel that whatyou said it was not the truth, that means you must now say soand say what I said previously was not the truth, today the truthis this, do you understand that?

MR PETROS: That which the Judge read now was a statementwhich I made in the past which - that was not the truth, thatwhich the Judge has just read. That was all fabrication. Whatactually happened was that on that day we went out looking forthis man to kill him. There were no taxis, we were not lookingfor taxis and trying to get me onto a taxi or anything like that. There is no question of me taking a taxi to Ennerdale, we simplywent there on that day to kill him. So that statement which hadbeen read out was a total fabrication.

QUESTION: That was the statement you made when you changedyour plea and pleaded guilty and said to us here today that youwanted to be entirely honest and truthful with the State and thatstatement was confirmed by your uncle. Are you now saying youwere lying when you said you wanted to be honest and truthfulwith the State in your evidence today?

MR PETROS: The State itself wasn't honest with me sohow can I be honest with the State?

QUESTION: Anyway my question, the question I am askingyou is that what you said in the statement to the Court was thatthe truth, that's what I am asking you, the version relating tothe taxi rank, that is what I am asking you?

MR PETROS: That is not the truth.

QUESTION: Tell me Mr Petros I don't know this place andcertainly members of the committee don't know this place, thisThree Million gang what is it, or what was it?

MR PETROS: The Three Million gang was a group of membersof the community who terrorised the community.

QUESTION: Do you perhaps know why they were called ThreeMillion?

R PETROS: No I don't, I don't know why they were calledthe Three Million Gang.

QUESTION: And you told us that you used time and againto come and visit Kroonstad, although you did not live here, whatwas the political situation like here in Kroonstad during thattime?

R PETROS: It was very tense, the political situationwas extremely tense. Too many things happened. The situationwas really quite disorderly.

QUESTION: From your evidence I would imagine that therewas in fact a branch of the ANC Youth League in this area?

R PETROS: In which area?

QUESTION: In this area, Maokeng or Kroonstad area?

R PETROS: Yes that is correct.

QUESTION: And did the Youth function freely without anyproblems?

R PETROS: No.

QUESTION: No what, did it have problems? What sort ofproblems did the ANC Youth League have?

R PETROS: There were always problems with the Three MillionGang. We could never march in peace or anything like that becausewherever the Youth met and gathered the Three Million Gang wasalso present to harass us and to terrorise us and to fight withus. There was never any peace in the whole of Maokeng.

QUESTION: Just for the record tell us a little bit forabout this SDU, what was it?

R PETROS: The SDU was the self-defence unit of the YouthLeague. I think it had three different branches and it had threedifferent names, I can't remember exactly, I think one was Slovosomething, the SDU was a body formed by the Youth League to protectand defend society.

QUESTION: Was it an affiliate of the ANC Youth League?

R PETROS: Yes it was affiliated with the Youth Leaguebecause some of the members of the Youth League were also membersof the self-defence unit.

QUESTION: Well you said that the deceased had killeda number of people, I don't know you said something like 140 orI misheard.

R PETROS: 102 that's what I said.

QUESTION: Well 102 is a big number, I am not goingto ask you to enumerate 102 names we would sit here the wholeafternoon but can you mention a few names if you still remember? Or let me put it to you this way among the people killed werethere people that you considered as leaders?

R PETROS: Yes some of these people I did regard as leadersand exemplary residents of the community.

QUESTION: Just mention a few names of the people whowere killed, who you think were killed by this gang and who youregarded as leaders in this area.

R PETROS: No I can't remember any of the names.

QUESTION: You don't remember the names?

R PETROS: No.

QUESTION: And what do you mean by saying that there wasnobody to defend you, can you just elaborate on that?

R PETROS: We often went to the South African Police andpleaded with them to help us to solve this problem, the problemof the gang and the more we went to them to ask for help the worsethings became.

QUESTION: You were asked by Advocate ...(indistinct)to whether you thought the killing of the deceased was justifiedand your answer was - well do you remember what your answer was?

R PETROS: I said no, it was not justified because I didnot want to take the law into my own hands and because I haverespect for human life.

QUESTION: Was it necessary to kill him?

R PETROS: It wasn't necessary to kill him but if theSouth African Police had done their job properly it would neverhave been necessary.

QUESTION: Sorry to question you again, reverting to yourlast answer that if the police had done their job it would nothave been necessary to kill the deceased, you remember in yoursupplementary affidavit which you wrote last month you said, andI am reading to you from it,

"On the 25th of February 1992 I armed myself with a firearmand followed him (that is the deceased) to the Kroonstad taxirank as he was coming from court where he had appeared on chargesand murder and attempted murder of ANC members".

do you remember saying that in your affidavit?

R PETROS: Yes.

QUESTION: So he was being charged with the offences ofmurder and attempted murder and facing those charges at the timeyou killed him, is that so?

R PETROS: No, he hadn't been charged with murder, hewas accompanying his gang who was attending court in connectionwith the murder case. It was not himself who had been charged.

QUESTION: Well why did you say this in your affidavit,your attorney prepared it for you, he read it over to you, youswore to it?

R PETROS: Maybe I speak Afrikaans, my attorney speaksEnglish, maybe there was some language confusion.

QUESTION: How many people were charged with the deathof the deceased besides yourself?

R PETROS: Four, four people.

QUESTION: What happened to them?

R PETROS: One was killed, the State withdrew the caseagainst one of them, one became State witness and the one wassentenced with me.

QUESTION: To your knowledge is this gang the Three MillionGang no longer in existence or is it still in existence?

R PETROS: I don't know whether they still exist or notbut if they were still in existence there would be no peace inthis community.

QUESTION: You were a member of the self-defence unitwere you?

R PETROS: That's right.

QUESTION: Was the self-defence unit itself also an informalorganisation or was it a formal, properly constituted organisation?

R PETROS: It was a properly constituted body formed aspart of the Youth League.

QUESTION: So you were a member of the self-defence unitand the ANC Youth League?

R PETROS: They were almost one and the same thing, theself-defence unit was slightly separate because some of the peoplewho belonged to the defence unit also belonged to the Youth League,they were more-or-less the same thing.

QUESTION: The deceased was not a member of any politicalorganisation was he?

R PETROS: As I said this person had made a statementthat he was a member of the IFP, that's all I know. But accordingto how I saw it that was just a smokescreen really. I don't reallybelieve he was a member of the IFP.

QUESTION: Mr Petros it seems to me that there is someconfusion about the two meetings which apparently took place. If I understand your evidence correctly the whole community ora large part of the community attended a meeting at which certaindecisions were taken, right, and later whether on the same dayor on the next day there was a meeting of the self-defence unit.

R PETROS: That is correct.

QUESTION: Did you attend both of these meetings or onlyone of them or neither?

R PETROS: I only attended one.

QUESTION: Which one did you attend?

R PETROS: The meeting of the self-defence unit.

QUESTION: So you don't know what decisions were takenat the other meeting except as far as you were informed by theparticular informer?

R PETROS: That's right.

QUESTION: And you also don't know who the person waswho conveyed this information because you arrived late at theself-defence unit's meeting?

R PETROS: That's correct.

QUESTION: So when you arrived at the meeting, the meetingof the self-defence unit, the discussion had already been disposedof or what exactly happened?

R PETROS: It was more-or-less towards the end of the meetingthat I arrived there.

QUESTION: And you said that you got the firearm froma Sergeant Jacobs?

R PETROS: That is correct.

QUESTION: Were you friends, you great friends with him?

R PETROS: Yes, yes.

QUESTION: And did you ever discuss these problems withhim, namely the fact that the police in Kroonstad were not attendingto the community's complaints and grievances?

R PETROS: No, never.

QUESTION: But you had full confidence in this man?

R PETROS: Yes as he also had confidence in me.

QUESTION: Would it not perhaps have helped if you hadspoken to him about this matter?

R PETROS: No.

QUESTION: Mr Petros in your evidence you've stated thatyou had lost confidence in the police and you had lost confidencein the legal system itself and this is what led the communityto take its decision on the 23rd of February 1992, is that correct?

R PETROS: That's correct.

QUESTION: Now are you able to enlighten this committeeas to what attempts had been made by the community at large toconvey its problems which it had with the Three Million Gang tothe police in Maokeng?

R PETROS: We wrote letters to the then Minister of Lawand Order Adrian Vlok to try and address this problem but nothingcame of it. If I remember correctly there was a Captain Duriesent here to try and solve the problems, the problem was onlysolved temporarily because he was then transferred if my memoryserves me correctly. The offices in the South African Policehere in Kroonstad even, the General in the Free State vicinity,they were approached regarding the situation here but absolutelynothing was done to solve the problem.

QUESTION: Now the Captain that you have mentioned CaptainDurie, who sent him? Are you aware?

R PETROS: I am not sure who sent him here.

QUESTION: When did the Three Million Gang come into existenceMr Petros?

R PETROS: I can't remember exactly, I think it was in1990, or maybe 1989, I am not sure.

QUESTION: You have stated in your supplementary affidavitthat initially the Gang committed pure criminal acts, that theGang ultimately took on a political character, do you recall makingthat statement in ...(intervention)

R PETROS: That's correct.

QUESTION: Now what was this political character it assumed? What was it doing for it to assume a political character fromthat of being purely a criminal gang?

R PETROS: I am sorry could you repeat the question itwas quite a long question?

QUESTION: Let me make it simpler. In your supplementaryaffidavits you've stated that when the Three Million Gang startedit started as purely a criminal gang but that later on it tookon a political character, I just want to know on what made youto conclude that it had taken a political character?

R PETROS: These persons claimed that they were supportersof the IFP and they wore red pieces of cloth around their necks.

Thank you, Mr Chairman. The applicant now on the stand is tobe cross-examined today. May I ask that he retakes the oath.

MR H G THULU: Still under oath

MR MPSHE: Yesterday you testified that in the year 1990you were the organiser of the Youth League and you were electedthe General Commander of the SDUs, is it correct?

MR THULU: Correct, sir.

MR MPSHE: Will I then be correct to state that all actionsor activities taken by the SDUs were taken as a result of yourcommands?

MR THULU: Indeed.

MR MPSHE: Petros testified yesterday as to how he killedDuvidi. Do you know as to who gave him that instruction?

MR THULU: By that time I was already in prison.

MR MPSHE: You don't have any idea as to how did he getthe command to kill?

MR THULU: Actually I never gave them an individual command,it was a general command from the onset. I commanded them todefend the community in all the way they can.

MR MPSHE: Were you aware of a meeting that took placeon the 23rd January 1992?

MR THULU: I wasn't aware, but we usually held such meetings. I was informed about the meeting.

MR MPSHE: Just to be fair to you. It is a meeting testifiedto by Petros where the community was involved where a decisionwas taken. Did you know about that one?

MR THULU: I heard about that after.

MR MPSHE: Were you told as to who chaired the meeting?

MR THULU: No.

MR MPSHE: Do you know as to who was responsible forthe meeting?

MR THULU: What I knew is that in such meeting only the(inaudible) members were allowed to enter, so my (inaudible) thatthey were members of the SDUs whom I knew.

MR MPSHE: Do you know anything about the so-called TMK?

MR THULU: Yes.

MR MPSHE: What is it in full?

MR THULU: In Afrikaans it is TIEN MANNEKRAG. In our language,cadres, it is TALENTED MEMBERS OF UMKHONTO we SIZWE.

MR MPSHE: Was this an existing ANC wing or organisation?

MR THULU: It was a defending structure actually. Itwas not an ANC structure, but there were people who took initiativeswho proposed the structure must be opened, those who were there,some of them were the members of ANC, the leaders.

MR MPSHE: When was this TMK formed?

MR THULU: Between October month and November 1990.

MR MPSHE: Formed by whom?

MR THULU: I was the one who formed it, organised theyouth to join the SDUs.

MR MPSHE: Did the TMK have any connection or relationwith the known Umkhonto we Sizwe?

MR THULU: Actually, no.

MR MPSHE: Now you testified that George Ramasimong,Duvidi, was previously a member of the Youth League.

MR THULU: Yes.

MR MPSHE: I want to believe then that if he was a memberof the Youth League previously you were in a position that youcan talk to him and enter into some form of negotiations withhim.

MR THULU: Exactly.

MR MPSHE: Now don't you think it would have been better,instead of him being murdered, that negotiations be entered intothrough yourself because you were in good contact with him?

MR THULU: I knew that very well and I tried it on countlessoccasions, but it failed.

MR MPSHE: What attempts did you do?

MR THULU: We once went to a small police station in

Gelukwaarts to go and settle up there the dispute, then we proposeda meeting, a peace meeting which will be held at the Roman CatholicChurch here in Constantia, but at a later stage, maybe after anhour, we hear that they have killed one of the comrades in Pumulang(indistinct), and then by that time the members of the SDUs were(witness speaking indistinctly) they didn't want to listen tome because they were angry. These people this side they are talkingabout the peace and reconciliation while the other side they arekilling the people.

MR MPSHE: So negotiations stopped on that day betweenyourself and Duvidi.

MR THULU: Yes, Sir.

MR MPSHE: Was there any other attempt made by yourself?

MR THULU: Yes. I once again tried to talk to him incourt at town and then he never wanted to listen to me.

MR MPSHE: You testified about a bus that ferried peoplewho had red bands on and were armed to the teeth. Do you knowthe ownership of the bus?

MR THULU: No, I don't know the ownership of the bus.

MR MPSHE: What bus was it? Where did it come from?

MR THULU: They used to transport the people locallyhere, from here to job and in town. It is public transport actually.

MR MPSHE: Oh, it is public transport owned.

MR THULU: Yes.

MR MPSHE: Which company is that?

MR THULU: I don't know the company. I knew the firstcompany which was Greyhound and then by the time I came out ofprison, Greyhound was no more there and then the very same buseswere non-existent.

MR MPSHE: Would you say the same bus company is stilloperating in the area?

MR THULU: I don't know, because I've got a long timein prison.

MR MPSHE: Do you know anything about an intended settlementor negotiation which was led by the local ministers of religion(inaudible)?

MR THULU: Yes, that I recall because the one who ledthe delegation was Rev Kosongo(?)

MR MPSHE: And how did that happen? Could you just explainto the committee?

MR THULU: Pardon?

MR MPSHE: Could you just explain to the committee howdid this happen, who was involved and why was it done?

MR THULU: The person I remember who was there was MrKosongo and I can't remember the others, but their intention wasto go there because there were people who could (inaudible) otherpeople as religious people.

MR MPSHE: How many ministers of religion, if you canrecall, all in all were there? Just an estimate?

MR THULU: Estimation is plus five or six.

MR MPSHE: And where did they attempt to enter into negotiations? Where was the venue and who was there?

MR THULU: They used to go to the Presbyterian Churchwhere Mr Kosongo was the reverend.

MR MPSHE: And were the members of the 3 million alsopresent?

MR THULU: They came once and the youth lost control. Senator Bloem managed to let them escape because the youth wasnow out of control. And the intention of the meeting was actuallyto bring peace back. Because the community at that time was soangry.

MR MPSHE: In trying to resolve this amicably, did youmake any attempts to contact the ANC head office to come to yourassistance?

MR THULU: Yes, we did make attempts.

MR MPSHE: When was this done?

MR THULU: I cannot remember the days specifically, butI remember that it was between October month and December wherebywe indicated to them. I even got information that some of the3 million members were in hiding. It was at about two o'clockand I took them to the camps. I took those children to SenatorBloem at about two o'clock and then he took them to Shell House.

CHAIRMAN: What children are we talking about now?

MR THULU: These were the members of the 3 million.

CHAIRMAN: You refer to them as children.

MR THULU: No, not (inaudible) children. I am referringthis to - I once caught two young children who were the membersof the gang and then the other members of the SDUs tried to killthem but I deny them and then took the children to Mr Bloem'sresidence and then he took them to Shell House.

JUDGE WILSON: How old were these two children?

MR THULU: Between 16 and 18 years.

JUDGE WILSON: And what did the other people want to doto them?

MR THULU: They wanted to kill them.

JUDGE WILSON: Was that the members of your self-defenceunion? Or who wanted to kill them?

MR THULU: The members of Premier. They were sittingin one place to defend their area there. So I caught those childrennear their camp.

JUDGE WILSON: Who wanted to kill them?

MR THULU: The workers of Premier.

JUDGE WILSON: The workers of Premier Milling wanted tokill two children?

MR THULU: Yes.

MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Thulu, are you still referring to theincident which happened October and December?]

MR THULU: Yes.

MR MPSHE: Did you personally accompany these childrento Shell House in Johannesburg?

MR THULU: No.

MR MPSHE: So you won't know who assisted them in ShellHouse?

MR THULU: No, I don't know. What I knew is that theywent with Comrade Dennis Bloem to Johannesburg.

MR MPSHE: Dennis Bloem took them to Shell House.

MR THULU: Yes.

MR MPSHE: Now you testified about the men or employeesof Premier Milling Company. How did they get involved?

MR THULU: These are the people who resisted everything

that was done by the 3 million gang, more than the community ofMaokeng.

MR MPSHE: The death of Masusu(?) caused by yourself,did you thereby achieve anything?

MR THULU: Yes.

MR MPSHE: What?

MR THULU: Peace and stability.

MR MPSHE: Are you telling the committee that becauseof this one man, Masusu, there couldn't be peace and stability?

MR THULU: Yes.

MR MPSHE: In what way was he stopping it alone?

MR THULU: As I have already said yesterday, he was alsothe spinal cord of 3 million. When you are a leader of an organisationthat is troubling the community, as soon as you fall down we assumethat the pillar has been destroyed and the members of his gangwould not attack back as they used to attack.

MR MPSHE: But the leader was George Ramasimong and notMasusu, that was the pillar of the 3 million gang.

MR THULU: He was also the leader.

MR MPSHE: You testified yesterday about your connectionwith Masusu and the fact that he was your idol for what he didin soccer, you remember that?

MR THULU: Yes.

QUESTION: Now that gives me the impression you were ingood terms, you can talk to him, as you once referred to him as"Groot man", not so?

MR THULU: Yes.

MR MPSHE: Don't you think it would have been advisableor even better instead of shooting him, as you did, to talk tohim as your "Groot man" and try to reason things outwith him?

MR THULU: I tried, as I said. Whenever I talked toDuvidi he was near Duvidi. They were close friend and they werealways together.

MR MPSHE: Yes, but did you ever take any attempts -look, I don't think he was sleeping with George Ramasimong. Atall times you would go to his place. Did you take such pains?

MR THULU: What I can tell you, he was a person who usedto terrorise the community and they used to stay together in oneplace. You'd never see him alone. They'd be together at alltimes.

MR MPSHE: When you shot him, that is Masusu, as you did,was he in any way armed with a weapon?

MR THULU: Yes, he was armed, he had a knife, a self-madeknife.

MR MPSHE: And yourself and other members of SDUs usedthe guns.

MR THULU: Yes.

MR MPSHE: Do you find it having been necessary to useguns on him when he only had a knife? Couldn't he be disarmed?

MR THULU: I beg yours?

MR MPSHE: Couldn't he have been disarmed?

MR THULU: No, there was no other way to disarm him. (inaudible) you cannot disarm someone, you just have to defendyourself so that you mustn't lose your life.

JUDGE WILSON: Do you say you were acting in self-defence?

MR THULU: Yes.

MR MPSHE: But if Mr Thulu, if I remember well, you testified that you shot him on the back first.

MR THULU: Yes.

MR MPSHE: Which tells me that he was facing anotherdirection other than yourself.

MR THULU: Yes.

MR MPSHE: Where were you defending yourself there, becausehe was not even facing you?

MR THULU: I want to explain how I defended myself. I have already told the committee that our intention was not togo and search for him, but we had to do what I did because wewere now in their base. You get so nervous and you think thathe is not the only person there. Even the people who are runningaway, you get so disturbed that you think they are attacking youand then you'd attack back so that you get out of that place safe. (APPLAUSE)

MR MPSHE: At that time when you were attacking him asyou did, did you have it in mind that you were acting on behalfof the ANC?

MR THULU: Yes, because I was defending the people whowere the members of the ANC and my community.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Mr Thulu, the Act in terms of which youhave made an application for amnesty, says that a person may begranted amnesty provided certain requirements are met. And itis this requirement which your application must meet. One ofthe requirements is that the Act, or in your case, the offencein respect of which you have been convicted must be associatedwith a political objective. Do you understand what I am saying?

MR THULU: Yes.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Now what is the political objective whichyou were seeking to achieve when you killed this man?

MR THULU: The objective for the reason that made meis that these people of the 3 million were terminating(?) AfricanNational Congress, and I was aware that because of our organisationbeing unbanned ....

JUDGE MGOEPE: Just start all over again. We couldn'thear your answer. You were answering my question to tell us whatpolitical objective was being served by or was being achievedby killing this person?

MR THULU: The political objective that I achieved, thatI achieved, was the voice - I saw that the people have voted forthe ANC during the elections, and that was the objective thatwe got.

JUDGE MGOEPE: No, I mean at the time when you killedhim, what political objective were you trying to pursue, at thetime when you killed him?

MR THULU: It was to protect the community and the membersof the ANC and I managed to get that.

JUDGE MGOEPE: I don't understand. In which way exactly?

MR THULU: I want to broaden this.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Just tell me what the political objective- the exact political objective that you were trying to achieve? The whole purpose of us assembling here is, I must tell you,is to try and find out what political purpose the killing of thisperson was going to serve. It will not help your applicationmerely to say that this man was a rapist, he killed 102 peopleand the like. The law does not say that if somebody kills 100people you must kill him. That is not what the law says. Inyour case, for your application to succeed, you must tell us whatthe political objective, exactly what political objective wereyou trying to promote in killing him?

MR THULU: My political objective was to see to it thatmy organisation is not being terminated by the gangster, thatis being perpetrated by the former government which is NationalParty and its forces.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Your political organisation being?

MR THULU: ANC.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Was this man a threat to the continuedexistence of the ANC?

MR THULU: Yes.

JUDGE MGOEPE: In which way?

MR THULU: We used to have mass campaigns. We used toprotest against the law, we used to protest against the council,making peaceful rainbow cause and whatsoever, and these peoplewho had been used to threaten the community so that the communitycan come and pay their rent forcibly and the Mayor, Osmond Sikwekwe(?)at the time and then he was told that if they don't pay they wouldbe evicted. (APPLAUSE)

JUDGE MGOEPE: Please don't, like we asked you yesterday,please don't do that because you are not really helping his case. When we decide whether or not to give this amnesty, we are notgoing to count how many times you clapped hands for him. Please,give him the chance to explain his case properly so that he canget the chance to apply for his amnesty properly. We are notgoing to be influenced by whether or not you clapped hands. Youare just really spoiling his case, please.

Now Mr Thulu, I am going to take you step by step and you mustlisten very carefully and answer the question as it comes. Ifyou don't understand it you must tell me. Was there any occasionduring which these - or first let me say. Who are these peoplethat the Mayor said or the councillor said he would send to forcepeople to come and pay rent? Is it the 3 million gang?

MR THULU: Yes.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Is there any occasion when in fact theydid threaten people to go and force them into doing anything?

MR THULU: Yes, it was just rumoured but after he hasconveyed the message we made it a point that they don't threatenthe people as he mentioned because we wanted the community tobe what we want it to be.

JUDGE MGOEPE: You have said that on occasions you heldsome protest marches. That is, I assume it to be members of theANC, am I right?

MR THULU: Yes, Sir.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Was there any occasion during which membersof the 3 million gang interfered with your protest marches, inthe form of trying to disrupt them or to make them fail?

MR THULU: Yes.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Tell me more about it.

MR THULU: During that time when everything was happening,there was a march organised to the councillors' offices. Thecommunity of Maokeng was complaining about the arrears, that theydo not even know about the high payments of the electricity, asif they were operating factories. As we were organising the peopleat the shopping centres, members of the 3 million gang came. They attacked the people, the people dispersed. We had to organisethe people back to the

shopping centre.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Any other occasion that you can remember?

MR THULU: That is the only one I remember, Sir.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Is there any other way in which membersof the 3 million gang interfered with the affairs of the ANC orany political organisation?

MR THULU: Yes.

JUDGE MGOEPE: In which way?

MR THULU: There was a time when a consumer boycott wasconducted, and we have been preaching to the people the importanceof consumer boycott. Those who had businesses, we wanted themto gain. We tried to talk to the councillors to tell them thatthe monies that we have to pay are so heavy - we made door-to-doorcampaign. And those people, the members, got into the streetsand our members were threatened, they couldn't continue with thedoor-to-door campaign. They were told to stop their message.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Did that kind of conduct on the part ofthe 3 million gang have a negative effect on the campaign forthis consumer boycott?

MR THULU: Yes, because the community of Maokeng wasso threatened. If you went into a house as a family you knowto explain to them what was happening, they will say to you itdoesn't help for you to come and tell us. We know that we haveto be part of this, but tomorrow when we come back 3 million gangis going to kill us saying that we have been involved in the marchtogether with the members of the ANC.

JUDGE MGOEPE: I don't know if you would be able to havean answer to this question, but in so interfering with the activitiesof the organisation, what did the 3 million gang actually standto gain?

MR THULU: They wanted to terminate ANC.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Did you think there would be any benefitto them by having the ANC terminated?

MR THULU: Yes.

JUDGE MGOEPE: What benefit do you think would be there?

MR THULU: The Council would carry on letting the peoplepay very high rates on top of the threats that the community hadalready received.

JUDGE MGOEPE: When you speak of the Council, are youreferring to the Maokeng Town Council?

MR THULU: Maokeng Town Councils, the former one.

JUDGE MGOEPE: It is fairly known throughout the countrythat there was a time when there were Town Councils and Mayorswhich were rejected by the majority of the black people throughoutthe country. Is the Council that you are referring to that kindof Council?

MR THULU: Yes.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Where did the revenue for the Council comefrom? Do you know?

MR THULU: Can you please repeat your question?

JUDGE MGOEPE: For the Council to run properly, I am sureit needed to have money.

MR THULU: Yes.

JUDGE MGOEPE: What were the sources, where did the Councilget its monies from?

MR THULU: I think it was one of the Nationalist Partytools, they used to get money from the Nationalist Party.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Did the Council also collect money fromthe residents or want to collect money from the residents in theform of the tariffs, such as for electricity and water etc. etc?

MR THULU: Yes.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Were there any boycotts aimed against paymentof those things?

MR THULU: Yes.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Is this one of the boycotts that you saythe 3 million gang interfered with?

MR THULU: Yes.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Yesterday you testified about a possiblerelationship between, or collusion between the police and possiblythe prosecutors or prosecutor. Now did you see any visible relationshipor any evidence of working together between the 3 million gangand the Town Council?

MR THULU: Yes.

JUDGE MGOEPE: How did they work together?

MR THULU: The then Council and the 3 million gang collaboratedbecause on many occasions we would see that the Mayor's transportwould be used by the 3 million gang members to attack the communityof Maokeng.

JUDGE MGOEPE: You have said two things in that sentence,and I want you to treat them separately. Firstly you have saidthat members of the 3 million gang used to be transported by thekombis which belonged to the then Mayor.

MR THULU: Yes, that is what I said.

JUDGE MGOEPE: And then you said they would attack peopleor something to that effect with the kombis. Let's leave thatfor a while. On how many occasions did you see members of the3 million gang being transported in the vehicles of the Mayor? Whether they were going for shopping or for a picnic or to goas you say to go and kill people it doesn't matter. I just wantto know how many times did you see them being transported in thevehicles of the Mayor?

MR THULU: This used to happen almost everyday becausethese were the people. The kombis would take them to town andgo to town to take them back. If they were supposed to appearbefore the court, they would be taken by those kombis and thenbe taken back in the same kombis.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Were these kombis operating as taxis inwhich any person could get into them, or would these kombis transportonly members of the 3 million gang?

MR THULU: At first they were the public transport, butafter the community had a campaign against him he deemed it fitto use them for the 3 million gang.

JUDGE MGOEPE: So at some stage the people of Maokengrefrained from using the kombis of the Mayor.

MR THULU: Yes, Sir.

JUDGE MGOEPE: They were initially used.

MR THULU: Yes.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Now after the people decided not to usehis taxis he then used it for the purpose of transporting the3 million gang.

MR THULU: Yes.

JUDGE WILSON: Were these taxis that belonged to himin his private capacity?

MR THULU: Yes.

JUDGE MGOEPE: How many kombis are we talking about?

MR THULU: There would be about five or six. He hada lot of kombis.

JUDGE MGOEPE: What do you mean when you say the membersof the 3 million gang also used these kombis to attack membersof the public or the people?

MR THULU: I mean they were like an armoured vehiclewhen they wanted to fight, because everywhere they wanted to goand fight they would be sitting in that transport.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Did you see any such occasion where theyused these kombis?

MR THULU: Many a times.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Just give me the name of the Mayor at thetime?

MR THULU: Mr Caswell Qweqwe(?).

JUDGE MGOEPE: What do you mean by saying that on occasionsas the members of the 3 million gang drove into town with thekombis the police followed them?

MR THULU: They used to accompany them so that they aresafe, so as to take their mission forward as well.

JUDGE MGOEPE: What are these objectives?

MR THULU: To terrorise the community of Maokeng andto see to it that the ANC is terminated.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Can you give us an idea more or less ofthe number of members of the 3 million gang?

MR THULU: The number of the members of the 3 milliongang?

JUDGE MGOEPE: Yes. I know it will not be exact, but justgive us some indication?

MR THULU: Plus or minus 30, plus those who were livingnear to (inaudible) because they feared that if they don't jointhey will be killed, but the original members, they were plusor minus 30.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Would they fill all the five to six kombisanyway?

MR THULU: Yes, plus those who were fearing their lives. I mean 30 people can make two kombis and then the others

were those maybe who lived nearer to (inaudible) and returningas if they are because of their life.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Were there people who were forced to jointhe 3 million gang or to be supporters of the 3 million gang?

MR THULU: I hope so. Because ...(intervention).

JUDGE MGOEPE: You think so.

MR THULU: It is so, because they used to do it, to forcepeople to join it.

JUDGE MGOEPE: And can you tell us more or less of thestrength, the strength of the self-defence unit?

MR THULU: The strength?

JUDGE MGOEPE: Yes. More or less how many people formedthe SDUs?

MR THULU: We started, formed about three SDUs but astime went on the community volunteered and then I was only informedthat (inaudible) at such a place we have another group, that peopleare going to defend themselves. Their aim was to defend themselvesagainst the 3 million gang. I would go to different places asa coordinator to see to it that they function perfectly well. They would be doing the same thing that we were doing.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Are you saying there were several cells?

MR THULU: Yes.

JUDGE MGOEPE: But you don't know how many individualpeople, how many people in each cell, that you don't know.

MR THULU: That one I don't know.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Were these cells all over the townshipmore or less?

MR THULU: Yes.

JUDGE WILSON: You said a moment ago that the South AfricanPolice used to accompany them so that they were safe. You remembertelling us that?

MR THULU: Yes.

JUDGE WILSON: Who did they have to protected against?

MR THULU: The community.

JUDGE WILSON: So they were in danger from the community,were they?

MR THULU: Because they made people to be like that againstthem.

JUDGE WILSON: Where did you get your firearm from?

MR THULU: One of the community members gave me a firearm?

JUDGE WILSON: Who?

MR THULU: I can't recall the name because it is a longtime now, but if he can come here I can point him.

JUDGE WILSON: You can't remember somebody who gave youa firearm?

MR THULU: Yes.

JUDGE WILSON: What happened to the firearm?

MR THULU: The police took the firearm.

JUDGE WILSON: When was that?

MR THULU: A week before I can get arrested.

JUDGE WILSON: On this charge?

MR THULU: Yes.

JUDGE WILSON: And how long had you had the firearm?

MR THULU: Four months.

JUDGE WILSON: So you remember that.

MR THULU: Yes, I still remember well.

JUDGE WILSON: You still remember well, do you?

MR THULU: Yes.

JUDGE WILSON: But you can't remember who.

(BEGINNING OF SECOND SIDE OF TAPE 3 - ENGLISH INTERPRETER

INAUDIBLE: )

JUDGE WILSON: So were you given the gun as soon as youwere released on bail?

MR THULU: It just happened like that; I never organisedit.

JUDGE WILSON: Why did you take a gun when you were outon bail?

MR THULU: For the sake of my community's lives and myorganisation to defend them.

JUDGE WILSON: How many times had you been in prison?

MR THULU: On countless occasions, I can't remember well.

JUDGE WILSON: Excuse me?

MR THULU: On countless occasion, I couldn't rememberwell.

JUDGE WILSON: And you took a gun as soon as you werereleased on bail to protect your community. Is that what youwant us to believe?

MR THULU: Exactly.

CHAIRMAN: Did the police ask you where you got the gunfrom?

MR THULU: Yes.

CHAIRMAN: Did you tell them who it was?

MR THULU: No.

ADV DE JAGER: These kombis that were used by the 3 milliongang, were they also used by other members of the public, of thecommunity?

MR THULU: No, the public boycotted the taxis.

ADV DE JAGER: So they were taxis that's been boycottedby the community out of their own free will.

MR THULU: Pardon?

ADV DE JAGER: The community decided to boycott the taxisout of their own free will.

MR THULU: Yes.

ADV DE JAGER: And you've already told us that the policeprotected the taxis when they carried members of the 3 milliongang because the community may attack them, is that correct? You also once used a kombi to go to Trombe, is it so?

MR THULU: Yes.

ADV DE JAGER: Was that also a taxi?

MR THULU: Yes.

ADV DE JAGER: To whom did that taxi belong?

MR THULU: Mr (inaudible).

ADV DE JAGER: So it was another owner of taxis, competingtaxi rank.

MR THULU: Yes.

ADV DE JAGER: Was there a taxi war sort of in thosedays too or not?

MR THULU: Ja, it was operating taxi by that time. Itwas operating to transport the public.

ADV DE JAGER: But I think you don't follow my question. Was there a sort of taxi war between two taxi groups or didn'tthe taxi people have a war at that stage?

MR THULU: No.

ADV DE JAGER: You said they were transported by the kombiswhen they had to appear in court, is that correct?

MR THULU: Yes.

ADV DE JAGER: Were some of the members of the 3 milliongang arrested and did they have to appear in court?

MR THULU: Yes.

ADV DE JAGER: And what happened to them?

MR THULU: They just got released.

ADV DE JAGER: Do you know of people giving evidence againsthim in those cases?

MR THULU: No.

ADV DE JAGER: Would the people be afraid to give evidenceagainst them?

MR THULU: That's true, Sir.

ADV DE JAGER: Did the police enquire and try to get evidenceagainst them?

MR THULU: No.

ADV DE JAGER: What you know of, or did they in factnot even try to get evidence against them?

MR THULU: They didn't even try.

ADV DE JAGER: But they have arrested them, so they musthave grounds to believe they have done something wrong.

MR THULU: The reason to arrest them, they wouldn't arrestthem. They wanted the community to leave them alone. They wouldtake them and put them in gaol. It was just something that wasbeing played to take them from the community. They arrested themfor safety sake from the community and the community's anger.

JUDGE WILSON: But you said they appeared in court.

MR THULU: Yes, even the very same court conspired withthe 3 million gang.

ADV DE JAGER: Did the 3 million gang recruit members fromall over the community?

MR THULU: Yes, they recruited members all over the community.

ADV DE JAGER: Did they even recruit members who belongedto the ANC?

MR THULU: Yes.

ADV DE JAGER: Did those members remain members of theANC?

MR THULU: Yes, I still remember two of them.

ADV DE JAGER: Are they still members of the ANC now?

MR THULU: They are not alive any more.

ADV DE JAGER: What happened to them?

MR THULU: One of them was killed by the community atSashoville(?) he was stoned to death. And the other one waskilled by the SDU members during a war or during a fight.

ADV DE JAGER: How many members of the 3 million ganghave been killed over the years by the SDUs or the community?

MR THULU: I don't have any specific number, but it isbetween 20 and 25.

ADV DE JAGER: Was that the original founder members?

MR THULU: And the others who crossed from ANC and joinedthe gangster.

MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Thulu, will you tell us how many peoplestayed Maokeng Township? Are you able to approximate the numberof people?

MR THULU: No.

MS KHAMPEPE: Will you say you have about 50 000 people,you have about 5 000 residents in Maokeng Township?

MR THULU: I remember the statistics were up to 130 000residents of Maokeng. It was in 1991.

MS KHAMPEPE: Do you have other political parties formingpart of the community of Maokeng Township? Would you have theANC, the IFP and the PAC and such other parties?

MR THULU: AZAPO was there and the PAC was there, butwhen I left the IFP was not here. I don't know presently is itthere or not.

MS KHAMPEPE: And are you able to tell us what the concentrationlevel within the 3 million gang was? How many percentages youhad of the AZAPO membership with forming part of the 3 milliongang?

MR THULU: Some of them joined the 3 million gang andI met their leaders. I still remember when I met their leaders. They were with Duvidi in the court of law and they were alreadystaying at Trombo(?), which was a very strong (inaudible). Icalled the two of them aside. I said to them, Look, this is irrelevant,we are fighting for one thing. I am requesting you, be awarethat the Nationalist Party is using the 3 million gang. I don'twant to land up in a situation where we would be fighting againstyou. They asked me, what do you want us to do? I said the communityknows that you are now part of the 3 million gang. I will goback to the community and tell them what to do and then you haveto go back to your different homes until I resolve this issue.

MS KHAMPEPE: Let me ask you a very direct question,Mr Tulu. Was the 3 million gang threatening the whole communityof Maokeng, which consisted of other different political parties,or did it direct its attacks predominantly on the ANC members?

MR THULU: Directly on the ANC members.

MS KHAMPEPE: Are you able to give us examples on whichyou drew this conclusion that their attacks were directed onlyto ANC members?

MR THULU: Yes.

MS KHAMPEPE: Will you please do that, Mr Tulu, whichwill assist us.

MR THULU: It happened that I was together with the membersof the SDUs. I was with (inaudible) from Kentucky and we wantedto cross the street. Bloem had been to the

doctor. Someone insulted him with his mother. We met with theother comrades and the SDUs were so disturbed and they wantedto attack and then (inaudible) and he said we know who are thepuppets, we don't have to worry. And it happened to me when theykilled Comrade Ngesile very close to the (inaudible). When theyleft they went direct to my home. The previous day I was goingto the doctor for ulcer treatments but they were aware that Iwas sick. Fortunately enough I was together with some membersof the SDU and they drove them back when they tried to kill me. And when we approached the corner we saw a police van. And thenwe could see that they were driven to this place by the police. And I was a member of the ANC and I was the leader of the SDUs.

MS KHAMPEPE: What was the intention behind the formationin Maokeng Township of the SDUs?

MR THULU: To defend the community and African NationalCongress, the termination of African National Congress against3 million gang.

MS KHAMPEPE: That was the main intention behind theformation.

MR THULU: Of SDUs.

MS KHAMPEPE: And when was the SDU formed? You are theCommander?

MR THULU: Yes.

MS KHAMPEPE: When was it formed?

MR THULU: Before the end of the month November.

MS KHAMPEPE: Which year?

MR THULU: In 1990.

MS KHAMPEPE: When did the 3 million gang come intoexistence?

MR THULU: I still recall very well. It started existingbetween June month and July month.

MS KHAMPEPE: Which year?

MR THULU: The very same year, 1990.

MS KHAMPEPE: Yesterday there was evidence led by MrPetros that when the 3 million gang started, it started as a criminalgang involved in ordinary criminal activity, but it later tookon a political character.

MR THULU: Yes, you see that's how they used to (inaudible). He wanted us to avoid the fact that the government was part ofwhat they were doing. What I can tell you is, Roland Petros isa member of the SDU under our command, the other commanders ofthe SDU. He doesn't have that kind of information. We have alot of information and they were just doing the defence for thecommunity through our (inaudible)

MS KHAMPEPE: I am unable to get your response to myquestion.

MR THULU: What I am trying to say is, when he saidthey were a criminal group, it was a tactic from the police as

well as the Council so that this was not a group to attack thepeople. The Council and the police were behind them actuallybecause as leaders we used to hold meetings with the Council regardingthe rent issues and we were then told that these people are notpaying. My organisation will come and evict them. Now we knewthat what they were doing to the community, it wasn't the truth. It wasn't the right thing; they were just disguising.

MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Thulu, are you in summary saying thatwhen the 3 million gang came into existence they took on a politicalcharacter and they were not initially involved in criminal activities?

MR THULU: That's what I am saying.

MS KHAMPEPE: Let's go back to the death of Mr Masusu. When was the decision taken to kill Mr Masusu by your organisation?

MR THULU: Actually we never took the decision of killingMasuso. What we did, we said that we will defend the communityagainst Masuso. Irrespective of what kind of defence are we goingto take, but we will just defend the community.

MS KHAMPEPE: When was that decision made?

MR THULU: When I started forming the SDUs as a Commander,that was the day when we decided as a general Commander. Duringthis time there was no formal Commander to say stand here anddo this. But even those who joined the SDUs later they have nevercome to me, they will do exactly what they found other membersof the SDU were doing.

MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Masusu was killed in 1991 and you hadalready taken this decision in about November 1990.

MR THULU: That is the act to protect the community againstthe harassment.

MS KHAMPEPE: Was there any reason why that order wasnot acted upon immediately, why you had to wait until the 11thFebruary 1991 to put that order into effect, or that decision,to implement that decision.

MR THULU: We were not in a hurry to kill him and itwas not our intention to kill him. We were just defending thecommunity against him. Even to go there, it wasn't our plan tokill him, but it just happened that at the time we had to defendourselves. That's how he died. If we were in any hurry to killhim we could have stood up at that time and go straight to himand kill him, but it wasn't our intention. We wanted to defendthe community, but the situation led to his death.

MS KHAMPEPE: Do I understand your evidence correctlywhen you stated just now that you actually went to Trombo(?) whichis the stronghold of the 3 million gang and you found yourselfsuddenly in the company of the 3 million gang and you had to shootyour way out to defend yourselves. Now why did you go to Trombo,knowing that it is the stronghold of the 3 million gang?

MR THULU: Usually during the day some of them used togo to town and we thought that by going to Trombo - because thepolice were (inaudible) of the ANC (inaudible). We thought thatby going to Trombo those left behind would run away and the policewould never have in their minds to go to Trombo to search forus and they would never think that we'd be at Trombo.

MS KHAMPEPE: Notwithstanding the fact that it was thestronghold of the 3 million gang who were being assisted by thepolice at all material times?

MR THULU: We realised at that time that it was the lastalternative to go to (inaudible). Because to remain in that areawhere the police were occupying some of us wouldn't be livingtoday. Now we went there and the incident took place and thepolice left our stronghold and they came to this area and we managedto go back to our area.

MS KHAMPEPE: How many kombis did you take Mr Tulu withyou to Trombo? Did you use, one, two kombis?

MR THULU: One.

MS KHAMPEPE: And how many people were there?

MR THULU: It was full.

MS KHAMPEPE: How many people were inside the kombi?

MR THULU: Fifteen.

MS KHAMPEPE: Are you able to enlighten us why Mr Masusuwas the one who you killed instead of Mr Duvidi if you wantedto weaken the 3 million gang?

MR THULU: I have never wanted for an individual, Duvidior Masusu, I was actually defending the people that were at Trombo. Before I could meet Duvidi I met Masusu and I had to (indistinct).

JUDGE WILSON: You were defending the people at Trombo. Is that what you said?

MR THULU: The aim of going to Trombo was not to go anddefend the people of Trombo.

CHAIRMAN: We will take the short adjournment at this stageand resume in 15 minutes.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION

JUDGE WILSON: There are two points I would like to clearup with you. These two AZAPO people you told us about, you rememberyou told us two AZAPO people who joined the 3 million gang.

MR THULU: Yes. Masheme Shisani(?) and Patrick (inaudible).

JUDGE WILSON: Do you know where they are now?

MR THULU: No, I don't know where they are now.

JUDGE WILSON: The second point I would like you to tellme is why were the police looking for you on this morning, themorning when you killed this man?

MR THULU: Because they heard that I am the one who killedthe deceased.

JUDGE WILSON: No, before you killed the deceased, whywere they looking for you?

MR THULU: I gave impact to - the reason for them tolook for me, I was the leader of the SDUs.

JUDGE WILSON: Yes, but you had been the leader of itfor months hadn't you? Why did they suddenly come looking foryou this morning, on this particular morning?

MR THULU: Which morning are you referring to?

JUDGE WILSON: The morning on which you killed this man,the 11th February.

MR THULU: They knew I was the leader of the SDUs sothat made them suspicion that I was some sort of a disturber tothis organisation which is the 3 million gang.

JUDGE WILSON: For how long had you been the leader ofthe SDUs?

MR THULU: From their origin, from the day when theywere started.

JUDGE WILSON: So why were they looking for you

on this morning of the 11th February? Was there any reason whythe police should come looking for you?

MR THULU: The reason for them to look for me, I wasthe leader of the SDUs and these units were disturbing the 3 milliongang to carry forward their aims.

MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Tulu, were the SDU members constantlyharassed by the police?

MR THULU: Yes.

MS KHAMPEPE: And these harassment took also the form ofthem being constantly being investigated by the police?

MR THULU: Could you repeat the question?

MS KHAMPEPE: The harassment that the police had on theSDU members, did it also take the form of you being constantlybeing under surveillance by the police?

MR THULU: Yes.

MS KHAMPEPE: Were you scared to sleep at your home? Yesterday you gave evidence that you actually spent most of yourtime at your girlfriend's place.

MR THULU: Yes, that's right.

MS KHAMPEPE: Why were you scared to sleep at your home?

MR THULU: Because the 3 million gang would attack meand the police would be able to arrest me.

MS KHAMPEPE: Were you more scared of the 3 million gangthan you were scared of being harassed by the police?

MR THULU: From both sides it was the same thing.

MS KHAMPEPE: So you actually saw both parties, that isthe police and the 3 million gang, as actually acting againstanything that the SDU members stood for and the ANC Youth League?

MR TULU: Yes.

ADV DE JAGER: Did the police know who your girlfriendwas?

MR THULU: Yes.

ADV DE JAGER: And they knew you were staying with her?

MR THULU: No.

ADV DE JAGER: But they knew you visited her, she is yourgirlfriend?

MR THULU: Yes.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Mr Thulu, I just wanted to clear something. You made reference to a state prosecutor yesterday. Preciselywhat did you say was his or her role with regard to the 3 milliongang?

MR THULU: She was the person who would protect themfrom going to gaol.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Sorry. Can you just repeat your answer? I had asked you what the exact role was of the prosecutor?

MR THULU: She made it a point that their cases wouldbe handled by her and then she would make it a point that theydon't go to gaol.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Is that all you can say about her?

MR THULU: That's all.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Because yesterday somebody told us thatat some stage she accommodated members of the 3 million gang intown. Do you know anything about that or you don't?

MR THULU: I know it from rumours, but I don't have anyevidence regarding that case.

JUDGE MGOEPE: We are talking about in the past whenpeople used to be seen in terms of being black and white in thiscountry. That was the position during that time, am I right?

MR THULU: Yes.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Members of the 3 million gang, were theyblack people?

MR THULU: Yes.

JUDGE MGOEPE: We were told that they killed a numberof people, these members of the 3 million gang, a figure of about102 was mentioned to us. Is that the figure that you were alsogiven?

MR THULU: Yes.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Were these victims black?

MR THULU: Yes.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Were arrests made in respect of some ofthese murders or not?

MR THULU: Arrests were made, people were arrested, butit wasn't of any use because they were released, they were neversent to gaol to show that they've done a very bad thing.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Were there any - or let me put it to youthis way. A witness told us yesterday that members of the communityhere complained about lack of activity by the police, they wrotea letter to a Minister and only thereafter a certain captain wassent here. Do you know about that?

MR THULU: Yes.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Such arrests as were made, were they madebefore that captain came here or after?

MR THULU: The arrests were made before he was brought

here. They were arrested and they were never sentenced. Theycame back to the township.

JUDGE MGOEPE: You say the arrests were made. Sorry,were they made after or before, I am sorry?

MR THULU: The police arrested them before and then theybrought them back to the community.

JUDGE MGOEPE: And after his arrival were any arrestsmade?

MR THULU: Yes.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Were the people not brought back to thecommunity there at that stage?

MR THULU: No. They came after a long time and thenthose who were involved in the murder cases were sentenced andthey stayed in gaol.

JUDGE MGOEPE: That was only after the captain arrived.

MR THULU: Yes.

JUDGE MGOEPE: To your knowledge, did members of the 3million gang kill any white person?

MR THULU: I don't have any knowledge of that.

JUDGE MGOEPE: You are a resident of Maokeng, isn't it?

MR THULU: Yes, that's true.

JUDGE MGOEPE: And Kroonstad is not very far from Maokeng.

MR THULU: Yes, it is not far.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Do you know of during that time any whitepeople who were killed by criminals around Kroonstad, not theirnames, but just the incidents?

MR THULU: I don't know.

JUDGE MGOEPE: You know of an incident, don't you duringwhich certain white people were killed in Maokeng by a group ofyoung people, don't you know about that? Or were you alreadyin gaol?

MR THULU: I was already in gaol when one of the whitemen - we never regarded him as a white person. He was stayingwith us here.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Who?

MR THULU: He was called Thabo.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Oh, you refer to an incident in which onewhite man was killed.

MR THULU: That's the one I am referring to, but whenyou asked me at first it must have slipped my mind because wenever regarded his colour, or we didn't see him as a white person.

JUDGE MGOEPE: That is why I said to you that we are goingback to history when we used to see colours.

MR THULU: Ekskuus?

JUDGE MGOEPE: That is why when I asked you about thecolour of the people, I told you that we are going back to historywhen we used to see colours. I actually wanted you to see colours.

MR THULU: It is true that was used, but in our organisationwe never regarded colour.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Was an arrest made in connection with thatparticular murder?

MR THULU: Yes.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Soon after the murder or did it take a longtime to have an arrest made in respect of that particular murder?

MR THULU: That's the question I cannot answer.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Thank you. Is there a police station inMaokeng itself?

MR THULU: Yes.

JUDGE MGOEPE: How many police stations in Maokeng?

MR THULU: Two of them, Sir.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Were they there during the time when about102 people or so were killed?

MR THULU: Yes.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Yesterday I asked the other person togive an example of the names of the ANC leaders who were alsokilled during that time and he was not able to remember a name. Are you able to give us an example, the name of one or two ANCleaders, or you regarded as ANC leaders who were amongst the peoplekilled by the 3 million gang?

MR THULU: No, no leader died.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Are you able to remember the name of anyvictim?

MR THULU: Yes.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Just give me an example of one?

MR THULU: Mduwisile Mbelwane.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Thank you.

ADV DE JAGER: You told us that round about twenty five 3 million gang members was killed, is that correct?

MR THULU: Yes.

ADV DE JAGER: When were they killed? Could you name,say a period, between months or which year round about? Not theexact dates, but round about?

MR THULU: After we've started the SDUs and even if Iwas still in gaol they have been killed.

ADV DE JAGER: Sorry, could you perhaps tell me whenthe first one was killed, the first killing took place?

MR THULU: I can't remember, so many things happened. I can't remember the date when they were killed.

ADV DE JAGER: Were there any of them killed before Duvidiand Masusu was killed?

MR THULU: Yes.

ADV DE JAGER: Were there any arrests made in connectionwith those killings?

MR THULU: No.

ADV DE JAGER: But you yourself was arrested in connectionwith one of those killings, wasn't it?

MR THULU: Of the killings of the 3 million gang?

ADV DE JAGER: Yes.

MR THULU: Yes. But those who killed the people, noone was arrested by that time.

ADV DE JAGER: Thank you.

CHAIRMAN: Are there any questions you would like to putto this witness?

MR MATSEPE: Thank you, Mr Chairman. Mr Tulu, I wouldlike you to answer my questions in Sotho. I think it would gomuch quicker and for the purposes of us to get quickly over this,I would like you just to answer the specific question that I amasking. Don't give me a long story. Let us start with the lastquestion concerning what Adv de Jager asked you here, the killingsof 3 million people. Besides these killings, were you the onethat you were involved in, do you remember a killing of an individualin the community called Alfie(?)?

MR THULU: Yes.

MR MATSEPE: How did that killing occur?

MR THULU: I was in prison by that time.

MR MATSEPE: You don't know about it. Okay, I will leaveit at that. Would you say that the killings that took place of3 million gang members, other than the one that you were involvedin, were premeditated and planned and then executed, or will yousay that those killings took place spontaneously from actionsof a crowd that had gathered?

MR THULU: Yes.

MR MATSEPE: I don't think you answered the question. It is a two-legged question. I want to find out, do you thinkthat there was a planned execution of a 3 million gang member? I am not talking about the killing of George Ramasimong.

MR THULU: No.

MR MATSEPE: What are you actually telling us? Thatthey were not planned, but they happened?

MR THULU: Yes, they happened, because it was duringthe time we defended the community (speaking indistinctly)

MR MATSEPE: Just to remind you again. I think it wouldbe better if you respond to my questions in Sosotho. Just keepon remembering that. You mentioned that you know of a personcalled Mdowisile Mbelwane. Besides Mbelwane, do you know of any,not leaders of the ANC, but members of the ANC who were killedby the 3 million gang, members? Do you know of any?

MR THULU: Yes.

MR MATSEPE: Can you remember the names of anyone, ofmembers of the ANC (inaudible) that were killed by the 3 milliongang, besides Mdowisile Mbelwane?

MR THULU: Sisi Sifatsa(?).

MR MATSEPE: Anyone else that you can remember?

MR THULU: That's the person I remember.

MR MATSEPE: You were asked by Judge Mgoepe with regardto

arrests made of 3 million gang members. I want to find out fromyou do you know whether there are any 3 million gang members whoare serving sentences resulting from a killing or some act, unlawfulact arising during that reign of terror as you described?

MR THULU: Yes.

MR MATSEPE: How many are they?

MR THULU: Two.

MR MATSEPE: Where are they serving their sentences?

MR THULU: Here in Kroonstad.

MR MATSEPE: Do you know whether they have applied forindemnity?

MR THULU: No, they did not apply.

MR MATSEPE: How do you know they have not applied forindemnity?

MR THULU: I tried to speak to them on several occasionsbecause we decided that we have to all apply for amnesty. Theysaid no, they are scared, they will not.

MR MATSEPE: When the captain that Adv Mpshe was referringto, when he was asking questions about arrests which were made,he is referring to Captain Derie(?), do you know about his comingto Kroonstad?

MR THULU: Yes.

MR MATSEPE: Now when he made arrests of certain 3 milliongang members, where were you then?

MR THULU: In prison.

MR MATSEPE: And these people who were arrested, the3 million gang members, where were they taken to, to which prisonto await trial?

MR THULU: The very same prison.

MR MATSEPE: Did you interact with them, were you stayingin the same cell.

MR THULU: No, we stayed in different sections.

MR MATSEPE: You never were able to speak with them andtalk about reconciliation or any other thing?

MR THULU: There was such a time because our sectionswere very close, only a fence was in between.

MR MATSEPE: If my memory serves me well, I could be wrongabout this, but you will have to help us. There was a memberof the 3 million gang who was killed in gaol.

MR THULU: Yes.

MR MATSEPE: Who is he?

MR THULU: Madsile Ramasimong.

MR MATSEPE: How is he related to George Duvidi Ramasimong?

MR THULU: He is the last born of the Ramasimong family.

MR MATSEPE: Were you in gaol when he was killed?

MR THULU: Yes.

MR MATSEPE: You don't know how he was killed, or whathave you learned about how he was killed?

MR THULU: No, I just hear because he was awaiting trialand I was already serving my sentence.

MR MATSEPE: Can you tell us about the arrests that CaptainDerie made, whether you know of any conviction that came as aresult of such arrests?

MR THULU: The two that I've already mentioned.

MR MATSEPE: According to your knowledge, was the communityfree to make - did the community feel, or did the community comeregularly forward to make statements to the police regarding whatthey know about the activities of the 3 million gang, or werethey intimidated?

MR THULU: They were fearful, Sir.

MR MATSEPE: You were also asked concerning the timewhen you were sleeping at your girlfriend's home hiding from thepolice and/or the 3 million gang. In relation to that I am puttingthe following question to you. Have you in your own personalcapacity, have you ever personally been exposed to an attack bythe 3 million gang?

MR THULU: Yes.

MR MATSEPE: Can you explain when? Don't give us a longstory please. Just give us more or less when it happened andshortly what happened?

MR THULU: I was at home when Comrade Mdomisile was killed. I realised when my younger sister came from outside she threwthe dish on the floor and when I peeped through the window I sawthe that the 3 million gang members were surrounding my house. We were lucky enough to be ...(intervention). Actually I confrontedthem ...(intervention).

MR MATSEPE: You escaped, you were not killed. Were youinjured?

MR THULU: No.

MR MATSEPE: Any other incident?

MR THULU: In town when we were facing the bus rank,we wanted to catch a taxi and we thought it was a taxi belongingto ordinary members of the community, but when we got nearer themembers of the 3 million gang chased us.

MR MATSEPE: They chased you and you ran away.

MR THULU: Yes, we ran away.

MR MATSEPE: Remember you were asked the question of- you kept on saying repeatedly "we were defending ourselves,we were defending the community", remember that line of questioning? Now I want you to respond to the following.

The incident when you killed Masusu, when Masusu was facing inthe opposite direction, you say he missed stabbing you, he wasalso intoxicated and then you shot him from the back. At thetime when you shot him in the back, he was not a danger to you. You will agree, because he was facing the other direction. Imean to you personally.

MR THULU: He was still dangerous, because if he couldhave got a chance to come back he would continue doing what hewanted to do.

MR MATSEPE: No, I am just talking about the moment,that moment. When somebody is facing in another direction andyou are having a firearm and you shoot him in the back, at thatmoment, split moment, he was not a danger to you, you will agreeto that?

MR THULU: I don't agree with you, Sir. That doesn'tmean he wasn't a danger to me. The situation at that time wantedme to do what I did to see that I was protected

MR MATSEPE: Yes, you have already said that, I agree,you said that. What I am trying to say is that when he rushedyou with a knife and he missed you, he failed to stab you. Butwhen you shot him in the back you exceeded the bounds of self-defence. That is why you are saying to this Commission you are wrong.

JUDGE WILSON: He is not saying that to this Commission. That is what you want him to say. He is saying to this Commissionthat he was acting in self-defence.

MR MATSEPE: I concede that, Mr Chairman. When he missedyou with the knife, he passed and then thereafter you shot him. So at the time when you shot him, he was not about to stab you,at the moment when the bullet entered his body, is that not so?

MR THULU: It is true, he was facing the other direction. Can I be given a chance to explain this that I want to emphasise?

MR MATSEPE: Yes, okay, but don't be long please. Becauseyou see, I am concentrating on the moment when the shots werefired, not other moments.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Sorry Mr Thulu, why did you shot Masuso,why did you shoot him?

MR THULU: I was scared, because when he came back hewould kill me.

MR MATSEPE: The 3 million gang, do you know whetherthey had any relationship with the IFP, the political party?

MR THULU: Yes. I know they had a relationship withthe IFP.

MR MATSEPE: How do you know this?

MR THULU: They used to raise their flag when they wereburying their members.

MR MATSEPE: You were also asked whether there are anypolitical organisations operative in Kroonstad then. You mentionedAzapo and the PAC. I'd like to find out whether you know whatpolitical affiliation Masuso was besides being a member of the3 million gang.

MR THULU: I don't know whether he belonged to any politicalorganisation, sir.

MR MATSEPE: I didn't hear that response, Mr Chairman.

MR THULU: I didn't know Masusu as any member of anypolitical organisation.

MR MATSEPE: You were also asked about the force or coercionthat was exercised on certain individuals to join the 3 milliongang, you remember that? Do you know of a person called Tsolo(?),a young man who was a member of the

3 million gang and who defected?

MR THULU: Yes.

MR MATSEPE: Were you able to talk with this young man?

MR THULU: Yes.

MR MATSEPE: With your talk with this young man, whatdid he say how or what caused him to join the 3 million gang?

MR THULU: He said he was intimidated. They said theywould kill him if he doesn't join.

MR MATSEPE: You also mentioned that the police usedto follow the 3 million gang around. I want to find out fromyou, as far as you know, do you know that the police could dosomething to stop the 3 million gang from either, I mean stopthe 3 million gang when they see them committing crime?

MR THULU: Can you repeat your question?

MR MATSEPE: Do you know whether the police would goout of their way to stop the 3 million gang members when theycommit crime? I see that you are just shaking your head. Canyou just respond for the purpose of the record?

MR THULU: Can you repeat the question, Sir?

MR MATSEPE: Do you know whether the police acted againstthe 3 million gang to stop them from committing crime wheneverthey saw them?

MR THULU: No.

MR MATSEPE: Do you have any information relating towho, which instance supplied or supported the 3 million gang withmoney for food to eat and shelter?

MR THULU: The money that they got was the money fromthe prosecutor and there were rumours that they were given moneyby the police, but the one that I want to testify upon is theone that I saw being given by the prosecutor ...

MR MATSEPE: Do you know a brother of George Ramasimongwho was working for Mr Caswell Qweqwe?

MR THULU: Yes.

MR MATSEPE: Can you give us information on that?

MR THULU: He was working with the Council that was ledby Mr Qweqwe and as time went on he is the person who was a gobetween, between Mr Qweqwe and the gang.

MR MATSEPE: Where was this person a prosecutor?

MR THULU: Pardon?

MR MATSEPE: Where was this person a prosecutor?

MR THULU: In Court B.

MS KHAMPEPE: In Maokeng Township or in town?

MR THULU: In town.

MR MATSEPE: You indicated in answering questions fromJudge Mgoepe that you could not continue to do door-to-door asa result of the intimidation from or the activities of the 3 milliongang, am I correct? Do you remember that?

MR THULU: Yes.

MR MATSEPE: You were also asked when you formed thesedefence units, as a result of which ultimately - of the operationsof which you ultimately killed Masuso, did you what you wantedto bring about. Do you remember that question? What did youwant to bring about with involving yourself in these activities? Do you remember that?

MR THULU: Yes, I remember that.

MR MATSEPE: My question to you is, during that periodwould you say that there was free political activity in the neighbourhoodof Maokeng?

MR THULU: No.

MR MATSEPE: Now what was your intention in committing

yourself to the defence units and ultimately finding yourselfhaving to kill Masuso?

MR THULU: Peace, stability and freedom of politicalactivity.

MR MATSEPE: Would you say that the community was intimidatedfrom participating freely in politics?

MR THULU: Yes.

MR MATSEPE: Do you remember or do you know of incidentswhere the 3 million gang hijacked transport from ordinary membersof the public, especially taxi owners?

MR THULU: Yes.

MR MATSEPE: How frequently was this done?

MR TULU: Pardon?

QUESTION: How frequently, how often?

MR THULU: This happened many a time, Sir, I can't evencount.

MR MATSEPE: Advocate Mpshe also asked you about negotiationsthat you would have undertaken to bring about peace. Immediatelyafter the incident that you spoke about when the conflict startedwith George Ramasimong arising out of the allegations relatingto one George Daniel, you remember that part of his cross-examinationby Advocate Mpshe. I am bringing you back to that. That incident,I'd like you to give the Commission a little bit more informationregarding what happened on that occasion.

If you don't understand to what I am referring to you must askme.

MR THULU: Can you please explain, Sir?

MR MATSEPE: Yes, you can continue.

JUDGE MGOEPE: He wants you to explain.

MR MATSEPE: If you can just raise your voice. I am sorry,I didn't hear that. I am referring you to an incident

which took place, if you remember you were asked what you didto try and negotiate and bring about peace. Do you know of anincident that took place after George Ramasimong now moved frombeing a member of the African National Congress Youth League andimmediately started these 3 million activities. Initiatives whichwere taken by the Youth League, I think Rev Gosongo(?), SenatorDennis Bloem, to bring about or to stop the conflict that wasbeginning to set in. Do you know about this incident?

MR THULU: Yes, I know.

MR MATSEPE: Can you tell the Commission what happenedat that incident?

MR THULU: It was decided that we had to meet the 3

million gang to sit down and negotiate and solve this. It istrue they were called to Mr Gosongo's church together with otherministers.

MR MATSEPE: Before you go on, were you there personally?

MR THULU: Yes. They were all called and we sat at MrGosongo's church and we tried to look into matters as how to solveissues. The thing that was emphasised there is the one I referredto yesterday that we didn't want the situation to reach the pointit reached. If Duvidi felt that his girlfriend was being interferedwith, we would solve that, but they ended up saying we realisethat you, the ANC, you are with George, Dennis George was attackedthereafter by the 3 million gang together with his family.

MR MATSEPE: Thus nothing turned out of those peace initiatives.

MR THULU: No.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MATSEPE

JUDGE MGOEPE: Mr Matsepe, before you put questions tothis witness, I just want to find out something from this witness. There is one vital point on which initially I thought I understoodyou, but after a few questions by your attorney, it seems to methat I understand you far less than I thought I did, and thisis important. You killed the deceased because you say you wereafraid the deceased might kill you.

MR THULU: Yes.

JUDGE MGOEPE: And that is the only reason why you killedthe deceased. Is that the only reason why you killed the deceased?

MR THULU: The other reason was that he was a personwhom (inaudible) because ...(intervention).

JUDGE MGOEPE: Just answer in Southern Sotho please.

MR THULU: That is not the only reason. The other reasonwas that he'd been the person initially to protect the communityagainst.

JUDGE MGOEPE: But you didn't say that when your attorneyasked you, or in fact when I intervened and asked you as to whyyou killed this person, you only said that you were afraid hewould kill you.

MR THULU: And then I further explained to say that thesituation at that present moment, that people were running upand down and you couldn't understand who would come to you tohurt you, so you were supposed to defend yourself. That is oneof the reasons that we decided to shoot at him because we didn'tknow, except him, who else was on the scene to attack us.

JUDGE MGOEPE: You didn't kill him because of the factthat he was frustrating the political activities of the

ANC, did you?

MR THULU: I want to explain this clearly. It is true,he was doing that, he was frustrating the activities, but nowI am being asked two different questions here. The first oneis at the place, what made me kill him. When you come back youask me didn't I kill him because he was hurting the community. That was the reason that made us form SDUs against him becausehe was harassing the community, but at the time when we were therehe was killed because of the situation that was reigning there. We had to defend ourselves to escape the area alive.

JUDGE MGOEPE: So you killed him for a reason other thanthe (inaudible) reason to defend yourself.

MR THULU: Both.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Then please say so. Please say so wheneveryou are asked, don't give one. Give both. Sorry, what do youmean by both?

MR THULU: I killed him because my life was in dangerat that time and the second point, I wanted to defend the community.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Thank you.

JUDGE WILSON: As I understand you, the reason that youwanted to defend the community was a basic reason that existedfor a long time.

MR THULU: Exactly.

JUDGE WILSON: But on this occasion the specific reasonwhy you killed him was you were afraid he might turn on you andkill you or that others might kill you. You were acting in self-defence,of yourself and the other people who were there.

MR THULU: At that time.

JUDGE WILSON: At that time.

MR THULU: Yes, but generally it was to defend the community.

JUDGE WILSON: Yes, but at that time you killed him - youwere thinking only of defending yourself, is that so? That'swhat you've said time and again.

MR THULU: And the others who were there.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Sorry, I interrupted you, I apologise. You can go ahead.

MR MATSEPE: One of the Committee members asked you aquestion regarding Mrs Pienaar. Which part did she take? Andwhen you answered you said she should take care that the membersof the 3 million gang do not go to gaol. Do you still rememberthat? Now the question is, how did she manage to do this, becausethe magistrate was the only person to take a decision.

MR THULU: That wasn't a hidden fact, because most ofthe time the courts around here, before the magistrate would sentencehe would ask the prosecutors, how do you view this case, and mostof the time it would appear that the decision that would be takenwould be taken because of the feelings of the prosecutor who wasthen Mrs Pienaar.

MR MATSEPE: The cases for the 3 million gang people,were they handled by one magistrate or different magistrates?

MR THULU: They went to one magistrate most of the timeand the same prosecutor and it happened that if the magistratewas in the other case he would be called into this case of the3 million gang.

MR MATSEPE: In other words, you are telling this Committeethat their cases were handled by one prosecutor, by one magistrate?

MR THULU: That is what I will briefly say.

MR MATSEPE:: Do you know the name of the magistrate?

MR THULU: I remember the name Basson.

MR MPSHE: How many cases do you know of that were takenby this magistrate?

MR THULU: Many of them, countless, I can't even count.

CHAIRMAN: Are you talking about the cases relating tothe gang?

MR THULU: Yes, Mr Chairman.

MR MATSEPE: Mr Chairman, I have no further questionsto this witness. I wish to proceed with the next applicant.

CHAIRMAN: You are excused.

MR MATSEPE: I call the next applicant.

B J MPONDO: s s

MR MATSEPE: Thank you, Mr Chairman. I want to explainthe case to you before I proceed with my questions, so that wecan understand where we stand now.

You were accused of a murder of the deceased and you were foundguilty.

CHAIRMAN: Which deceased.

MR MATSEPE: The deceased was Tsietsie Leboko. And youwere convicted of his murder. Let me start by saying, do youagree that you perpetrated his murder?

MR MPONDO: Yes.

MR MATSEPE: Do you realise that now you are not beingtried; you have just come here to tell us about what happened.

MR MPONDO: Yes, I realise that.

MR MATSEPE: Do you understand that you have come to makea certain plea here to the Committee?

MR MPONDO: Yes, I do understand that.

MR MATSEPE: I want us to understand each other on thisfact and I want to make sure whether you understand the reasonfor being here, so that when you answer the questions you wouldhave that in mind that you have come to us for amnesty here. Do you understand that?

MR MPONDO: Yes, I do understand.

MR MATSEPE: What plea are you coming to make here?

MR MPONDO: I have come to plea for amnesty.

MR MATSEPE: You have then taken an oath that you willtell the truth. Do you know that in order to be granted amnesty,you have to tell the truth?

MR MPONDO: Yes.

MR MATSEPE: The whole truth?

MR MPONDO: Yes, I do understand that.

MR MATSEPE: You don't have to hide anything from us,do you understand that?

MR MPONDO: Yes, I do understand.

MR MATSEPE: If there is anything that you are hidingaway, and the Committee comes to know that, or is not satisfiedabout certain facts that you disclosed to them, and become sure(?)that you are a person who tells the truth and reveal everythingto them, this Committee has the right, according to the law, notto grant you any amnesty, do you understand that?

MR MPONDO: Yes, I do understand that.

MR MATSEPE: Therefore let me start by saying how oldare you?

MR MPONDO: I am 24 years old.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Sorry to interrupt, Mr Matsepe. What yourattorneys could also have chosen to tell you is that in orderto get your amnesty you must show to this Committee that the actwhich you have committed was committed with the purpose of pursuinga political objective. There is no point in burdening this Committeewith details which do not in any way go towards showing us thatthe offence was committed with a political objective. It willnot help us to sit here and listen to details which don't go tothat point. I think your attorney should also have told you that. But I am taking that liberty to inform you so.

MR MATSEPE: You have already heard that if you agree thatyou performed this act and it doesn't have any political influence,your plea for amnesty will not be granted. Therefore the Committeewants to know before we go further, how old are you?

MR MPONDO: I am 24 years old.

MR MATSEPE: When this happened, how old were you?

MR MPONDO: I was 19 years old.

MR MATSEPE: I would like you to raise your voice so thatI can hear you because I don't have the earphones with me. MRMPONDO: I was 19 years old.

MR MATSEPE: Were you at school?

MR MPONDO: No, I had left school by that time.

MR MATSEPE: In what standard were you when you left school?

MR MPONDO: I was in Std 7.

MR MATSEPE: At which school were you?

MR MPONDO: I was at (inaudible) School in Viljoenskroon.

MR MATSEPE: When this incident happened where were youstaying?

MR MPONDO: I was staying in Pumulung. That was athome.

MR MATSEPE: Where were you staying?

MR MPONDO: I was staying in Pumulung(?).

MR MATSEPE: Do you mean Pumulung Location at Maokeng?

MR MPONDO: Yes.

MR MATSEPE: Were you ever taking part in a certain politicalorganisation?

MR MPONDO: Yes.

MR MATSEPE: Which organisation is that?

MR MPONDO: It is the ANC.

MR MATSEPE: In which way did you enter the ANC?

MR MPONDO: I became a member of this political organisation.

MR MATSEPE: Were you in the ANC organisation or wereyou another part of the ANC?

MR MPONDO: I was in the ANC organisation.

MR MATSEPE: Do you know of the ANC Youth League?

MR MPONDO: Yes, I know the ANC Youth League. I wasa member of the ANC Youth League.

MR MATSEPE: In the membership in the ANC Youth League,were you in any committee or were you just an ordinary member?

MR MPONDO: I was just an ordinary member.

MR MATSEPE: Now coming to this incident which you werefound guilty of. It happened on the 11th May 1991.

MR MPONDO: No, it happened on the 4th May 1991.

CHAIRMAN: His application form shows the other date, the11th May.

MR MATSEPE: I say the 11th May because in your letterof plea for amnesty you say this incident happened on the 11thMay 1991. Maybe you made a mistake there.

MR MPONDO: Yes, it was a mistake. It happened onthe 11th May, not on the 4th - on the 4th, not on the 11th.

MR MATSEPE: We heard testimony regarding the 3 milliongang. Do you know of that?

MR MPONDO: Yes, I know the 3 million gang.

MR MATSEPE: We also heard testimony that there wereunits, which were called SDUs that were formed.

MR MPONDO: Yes, I know about that.

MR MATSEPE: Did you ever take part in this unit?

MR MPONDO: Yes, I was a member of the SDU.

MR MATSEPE: Were you a member of this ANC wing, in whicharea were you? Because it seems there were many units.

MR MPONDO: I was at Pumulung.

MR MATSEPE: Then on the 4th May 1991 this incident happened. Can you please explain to the Committee what happened on thatday.

MR MPONDO: On the 4th May, it was on a Saturday. Iwas together with one of my comrades at home. When we were stillat home a girl arrived at home and she said to me there is a kombiwhich has brought about two 3 million members near the church. At that time Comrade Tsediso was still washing in the house. I thanked the girl for what she told me and I said to her I willprotect myself. She then went away. After a long period Tsietsiearrived together with his other friend whom I don't know. I leftthem outside the house and I went to tell Tsediso that Tsietsieis here and he is with the other friend, I don't know. I alsotold him about what I heard from this other girl before Tsietsiearrived. I then went back to Tsietsie and when I got outsideTsietsie was alone and his friend was not there. I asked himTsietsie where is your friend? And he said he is visiting hisrelative. I don't know where they are. And then I went to comradeTsietsie and told him to get into the house. I showed him toTsediso and Tsediso came to see him and then we sat down. Andthen I left the house with Tsediso to go and talk to him. Whilewe were still talking and telling him about what happened ComradeDaniel also arrived. Comrade Daniel's spirit was high. He lookedlike a person who was scared, and he said to me he saw the 3 millionkombi passing at my workplace and in the kombi I saw Tsietsie. I asked him Tsietsie and he said yes. I then asked him further,are you sure of what you are saying and he said yes, I saw TsietsieI know him very well. And then I said to him Tsietsie is in thehouse. And he got shocked when he heard that. And then I saidto them, what we have to do is to take Tsietsie to our comradesso that he can explain what is happening. And then we took comradeTsietsie. It was the three of us, together with Daniel and comradeTsietsie was fourth person and then we went away with him to lookfor our comrades. We were told that our comrades were at PiedPiper and we went there. On the way some of our other comradesjoined us and they were surprised why we were accompanying Tsietsieas they know he was a member of the 3 million gang. And thenwe went to the club where we found the other comrades but theynever listened to us. They chased us away.

MR MATSEPE: Can you please explain what the club is?

MR MPONDO: It is a drinking place. It is a nightclub.

MR MATSEPE: Can you continue please?

MR MPONDO: When we got there the comrades never listenedto us. They said we have to leave the place because that placewasn't okay for our comrades. Because there are other comradesamong us who are being looked for by the police. Therefore thepolice are still inspecting that area. Then we left and we wentto another tavern which is called Jack Nose. It is also a shebeen. When we got there I found the comrades there and I asked them,please comrades, I want to go home together with you so that wecan solve this issue of Tsietsie and then they agreed to comewith me. We left the place and on the way one of the comrades,it was Tsediso or Daniel who informed the other comrades we foundat Jack Nose of what happened. He said when (inaudible) at home. On the way one of the comrades asked Tsietsie how did he getto my place and who was with him. (Indistinct) answering thatTsietsie tried to run away and we chased him until at a housebetween the school and the Roman Church. We got him out of thehouse and we never asked him anything, and then we started stabbinghim with knives.

MR MATSEPE: What happened after you stabbed him? Didyou go to the police to tell them about what you did?

MR MPONDO: No, we went away. I never went to the police.

MR MATSEPE: After how long were you arrested?

MR MPONDO: I was arrested on the 10th June of the verysame year, that is 1991.

MR MATSEPE: In this case at court, did you find yourselfguilty?

MR MPONDO: No, I didn't.

CHAIRMAN: What does that mean, when you say "he foundhimself guilty"?

MR MATSEPE: Sir, I don't know whether the question wasinterpreted correctly, because I said as far as the indictmentwas concerned, were you found guilty? Were you found guilty forwhat you did?

MR MPONDO: Yes, I was found guilty.

MR MATSEPE: After you were found guilty, did you everstop to think about what you did?

MR MPONDO: Yes, I did, and I regretted what I did. But I didn't do this intentionally. That was the situationthat was reigning in Maokeng that caused me to do that.

MR MATSEPE: If you estimate, how old was the deceased?

MR MPONDO: He was still young by that time, but I don'tknow exactly how to estimate his years.

MR MATSEPE: Was he older than you or was he youngerthan you?

MR MPONDO: I would say he was older than me.

MR MATSEPE: The people who stabbed him, among the peoplewho stabbed him, are you the only person who was found guilty?

MR MPONDO: No, there was two of us, me and ComradePatrick Serola(?).

MR MATSEPE: Was he also found guilty?

MR MPONDO: Yes, he was also found guilty.

MR MATSEPE: Where is he now?

MR MPONDO: He is still in gaol, that is here in Kroonstad.

MR MATSEPE: You will remember that you were told atthe beginning that in order to be afforded amnesty you have toshow that the act you did you perpetrated under political influence.

MR MPONDO: Yes.

MR MATSEPE: We now hear that someone was running awayand you chased him and you stabbed him. To chase a person, apprehendhim and stab him, how does that come in line with politics?

MR MPONDO: I can explain like this to you. The problemis that Tsietsie was a member of the 3 million gang and the 3million gang was the gang that harassed the people of Maokengand the members of the ANC. They were killing all members ofthe community and all members of the ANC. Therefore, to end updoing what we did, was to remove the disturbance to the ANC andthe Maokeng community because at that time when the 3 milliongang was operating there was no free political activities in Maokeng.

MR MATSEPE: I want you to understand here, TsietsieLeboko, the minute when he got killed, there is no way where hetried to disturb any free political activity when you killed him,he was running away.

MR MPONDO: Matters are like this. To end up killingTsietsie, I don't know what was his aim in searching for my home,as he was a member of the 3 million gang.

MR MATSEPE: What if Tsietsie came there to inform youthat the 3 million gang were to attack you? Would you know aboutthat?

MR MPONDO: No, it was difficult for him to explainthat because he was asked how did he get to my place and whathe was coming to do and then he ran away. Tsietsie has alreadybeen a member of the 3 million gang and he claimed that he hasresigned from the gang. But he never did that. He never showedthat he had resigned because one day he came together with ComradeDaniel and said they had resigned and we accept them, but he wentback, he went back into the 3 million gang and the 3 million gangalso attacked Comrade Daniel who had resigned from the 3 milliongang and he was with them.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION

B J MPONDO: s u o

MR MATSEPE: When we last talked you will remember thatI was trying to let you explain to the Committee about this incidentwhere you killed Leboko, how does this come in line with politics. That is where I will start with my questions.

MR MPONDO: This incident comes in line in politicsin this way. The community of Maokeng, together with the membersof the ANC were not protected by the Government. So I saw itnecessary that we should protect ourselves and the community bykilling this person.

MR MATSEPE: You must remember that at that moment whenyou perpetrated this killing, Leboko was not at that moment harassingthe community. When you stabbed him were you given authorityby your leaders to do that?

MR MPONDO: No, our leaders only authorised us to protectthe nation and ourselves.

MR MATSEPE: That is why I ask this question becauseit must be clear to the Committee. Your leaders didn't say toyou go and kill this person.

MR MPONDO: No, they didn't say that.

MR MATSEPE: Who took the decision to kill Leboko?

MR MPONDO: We took the decision as the members of theSDU because Leboko is not honest with us because when we askedhim questions he decided to run away.

MR MATSEPE: Was the decision taken by the members ofthe SDUs who were present on that day?

MR MPONDO: Yes, those who were present on that daytook the decision.

MR MATSEPE: Did you perceive Leboko as someone who wasagainst you and your political organisation?

MR MPONDO: Yes, it is like that.

MR MATSEPE: Why do you say that?

MR MPONDO: I say that because the activities of the3 million gang were against us because on numerous occasions whenwe held protest marches and boycotts, the 3 million gang memberswould on many occasions disturb such protest and boycotts.

MR MATSEPE: Do you realise that Leboko also had parentswho loved him?

MR MPONDO: Yes, I realised that.

MR MATSEPE: Now when you appear before the Committeetoday, would you say to the Committee today that this incidentof killing Leboko was okay or is it not at all okay?

MR MPONDO: No, I would say that it was not okay.

MR MATSEPE: What would you say to Leboko's parents whomyou killed?

MR MPONDO: What I would ask from his parents and thecommunity at large is for them to forgive me because I didn'tdo this because I wanted to. I was forced by the circumstancesor the situation that prevailed in Maokeng.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MATSEPE

MR MPSHE: In your testimony you told us that you wantedto have peace in the area of Maokeng.

MR MPONDO: Yes, it is like that.

MR MPSHE: Did you not think that Tsietsie when comingto you that day, and stating that he had resigned from the 3 milliongang, didn't you think that he was going to promote your needfor peace in the area?

MR MPONDO: What brought Tsietsie to us on numerousoccasions, that is the claim that he didn't want to take partin the activities of the 3 million gang. It was for the secondtime that he came with this request. He did it the first time,claimed that he had resigned, but he went back to 3 million againand he also took part when they attacked one of our comrades,that is Daniel, together with the 3 million gang.

MR MPSHE: Was Tsietsie, the deceased, ever a memberof the Youth League previously?

MR MPONDO: No, I don't carry any knowledge of that.

MR MPSHE: Were you close to him?

MR MPONDO: No, I only came to know him when he wasa member of the 3 million gang.

MR MPSHE: In your own mind, what do you think couldhave prompted him to come to your place of residence>

MR MPONDO: I am not sure what brought him to my place.

Really I don't know what influenced him or forced him to cometo my place.

MR MPSHE: You further testified that when he was withyou and the other members you had not or you filed to establishexactly the purpose of his visit to you, but all the same youkilled him, you remember that?

MR MPONDO: Yes, that's what we wanted to clarify whyhe came to visit us when we were on the way to get home, but hecouldn't answer us. What he tried to do was to run away.

MR MPSHE: In what manner did you ask him about his visit?

MR MPONDO: One of our comrades asked him how did heget to my place and who was with him when he got there. And thenhe tried to run away.

MR MPSHE: What I am driving at is, was he politely askedor was he asked within anger?

MR MPONDO: No, he wasn't intimidated. He was politelyasked.

MR MPSHE: Who asked him?

MR MPONDO: One of my comrades but I can't rememberhis name.

MR MPSHE: Was he asked by only one person?

MR MPONDO: Yes, only one person asked him.

MR MPSHE: Are you saying to us that only one questionfrom one person made him run away without any anger whatsoever?

MR MPONDO: Yes, only one person asked him and he askedhim politely.

MR MPSHE: How many comrades were there in total?

MR MPONDO: There were many comrades at that time.

MR MPSHE: Estimated number?

MR MPONDO: I can't estimate.

MR MPSHE: Could there have been more than 20, less than3, more than 10, less than 9?

MR MPONDO: There were more than 20, yes, we were morethan 20.

MR MPSHE: And I want to believe all of you at the timewhen he was asked this question by one person, you were all concentratingon him?

MR MPONDO: No, we were still on the way, we were stillwalking.

MR MPSHE: Whilst walking?

MR MPONDO: Which question?

MR MPSHE: The question that you put to him what madehim come to you and then he ran away.

MR MPONDO: Yes, we were still on the way walking towardsmy place.

MR MPSHE: Where in particular amongst the 20 of you washe placed when this question was put?]

MR MPONDO: He was next to me and the other comrades.

MR MPSHE: Wouldn't you say there was due to your numberand due to the fact that he was from the 3 million gang, therewas enough intimidation on him at the time?

MR MPONDO: I am not sure about that.

MR MPSHE: In your application which you filled in foramnesty, page 4 thereof, you stated the following

"Secondly, they were having the support of the previousregime, SAP and former Maokeng Council, the Mayor was Mr CaswellQweqwe".

You remember that?

MR MPONDO: Yes, I can remember that.

MR MPSHE: We have already been told as to how Mr CaswellQweqwe was involved pertaining to the use of his kombis. Do youknow any other activity from his part as support to the 3 milliongang?

MR MPONDO: That is the only part he played, that Iknow of.

MR MPSHE: Further on your application, page 5, whenanswering the question as to who gave the order to commit thecrime, I want to believe is the killing of Tsietsie Leboko, youanswered by saying

"Mr Mashaba Petros Thulu".

Do you remember that?

MR MPONDO: Yes, I can remember that, but I explainedthat Comrade Thulo was a General Commander in the SDU. In thiscase he never gave me any instructions.

MR MPSHE: Why did you give such an answer to such aclear question as to who gave the command to do what you did,if he did not?

MR MPONDO: Comrade Thulo gave us the instruction thatwe have to protect the Maokeng community and the members of theANC and that's what he told us as our general Commander.

MR MPSHE: I am going to move to your supplementary affidavit,page 2 thereof the first paragraph, and I will quote for you

"My arrest and convicted arises out of the killing of TsietsieLeboko who was a member of the 3 million gang".

Then you say:

"An ostensibly criminal gang which became affiliated toIFP".

Do you remember that?

MR MPONDO: Yes, I can remember very well.

MR MPSHE: What is it that made you come to the conclusionthat the 3 million gang had affiliated to Inkatha Freedom Party?

MR MPONDO: One day when these people were going tobury one of their members, they used the Inkatha flags.

MR MPSHE: On how many occasions did you see this happen?

MR MPONDO: On numerous occasions.

MR MPSHE: How many times?

MR MPONDO: I can't remember well, but it happened onnumerous occasions.

MR MPSHE: Besides seeing the flags, is there any otherthing that made you come to the conclusion that they were IFP?

MR MPONDO: Yes, there is. It happened sometimes thatwhen you are in court these people would have Inkatha badges onthem and one day one of the members of (indistinct) who was BoetieKrag(?) called me whilst we were still in court and he showedme his membership card of Inkatha.

MR MPSHE: We listened to the evidence earlier on thatthe political organisations that were operative in the area wereANC, PAC and perhaps Apla and it was said that Inkatha was notoperative in the area.

MR MPONDO: Yes, it is like that.

MR MPSHE: Now how could they have affiliated to IFP whenno IFP existed in Maokeng?

MR MPONDO: I really can't explain how they came tosay they were Inkatha members. There was no day on which I heardthat Inkatha was coming to launch a branch there at Maokeng.

MR MPSHE: I want to believe that you will agree with methat then the allegation by the 3 million gang members and yourobservation about IFP may have been unfounded?

MR MPONDO: No, it is true.

MR MPSHE: Still on your supplementary affidavit, page3 thereof, the last paragraph, you said the following

"We had evidence that the gang was fostered by some membersof the SAP, as a surrogate akin to the "witdoeke" andBlack Cats which has caused a reign of terror in black townships".

Do you remember that?

MR MPONDO: I don't understand your question. May you

please repeat the question? I don't understand anything aboutthe Black Cats.

MR MPSHE: I will repeat the quotation. Page 3, Mr Chairman,of the supplementary affidavit, the last paragraph. I am toldit is page 25 of the index

"We had evidence that the gang was fostered by some membersof the SAP, as a surrogate akin to the "witdoeke" andBlack Cat which has caused a reign of terror in black townships".

MR MPONDO: The police members were the ones who weresupporting the 3 million gang and they were also protecting them.

MR MPSHE: How do you connect the operations of the 3 milliongang with "witdoeke" and the Black Cats?

MR MPONDO: There is no way these two groups come together.Really there is no way they come together.

MR MPSHE: Were these two forces, "witdoeke"and Black Cats operative in Maokeng area?

MR MPONDO: The "witdoeke" were the membersof the SDU who were staying at Gelukwaarts(?). They were theyouths who always had white bands on their heads and then we usedto call them the "witdoeke".

MR MPSHE: Were they formed by the SAP?

MR MPONDO: I don't know.

MR MPSHE: Mr Mpondo, I am reading from your own affidavit.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Mr Mpshe, I don't think that is what heis saying in his affidavit. He is comparing the organisations,not at the level of their formation, but the fact of their activities. Like the "witdoeke" they sought terror. He is notsaying that like the "witdoeke" they were formed bythe police. He is not comparing these movements

or organisations at the formation level, but he is comparing theeffect they had on the community.

MR MPSHE: Yes, I stand indebted to you, Sir, but he hasjust responded to one of my questions that the "witdoeke"was an organisation or consisted of members of the SDU and theywere called "witdoeke" because they were wearing whitedoeks apparently. I think that answer from him, if I am correct,bring a different perspective to me. Because the paragraph reads

"As a surrogate akin ..."

similar to.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Not in the sense that they have both beenfostered by the SAP. Not in that sense. But in the sense ofreigning terror.

MR MPSHE: Thank you. I stand corrected.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MPSHE

JUDGE WILSON: Do you remember making an affidavit beforeyour attorney on the 29th June of this year? Do you rememberthat?

MR MPONDO: Yes, I remember that.

JUDGE WILSON: And was it the truth that you said thereand which you swore to?

MR MPONDO: Yes, it was the truth.

JUDGE WILSON: In that affidavit you said that the deceasedcame to your house with an unknown member of the 3 million gangon the 11th May, do you remember that?

MR MPONDO: Yes, I remember that, but I said I madea mistake with the date. It was on the 4th May.

JUDGE WILSON: You said

"He claimed to have resigned from the gang but it laterbecame known to us that he had come to set

me up for an attack by the 3 million gang".

Do you remember saying that?

MR MPONDO: Yes, I can remember, but ....

JUDGE WILSON: And you then said

"When I went with him to the Command of my Unit in ...Maokeng, we were told that he had just alighted from a kombi fullof gang members".

Do you remember saying that?

MR MPONDO: What was said by the girl who came to mewho found me at home ...

JUDGE WILSON: You said in your affidavit you went withhim to the Command of your Unit. Did you go with him to the Commandof your Unit?

MR MPONDO: No, I took him to the other comrades sothat he can tell them what's happening about him, but we didn'tget those comrades.

JUDGE WILSON: Why did you say in your affidavit that youtook him to the Command of your Unit?

MR MPONDO: I was taking him to our leaders but we didn'tfind them there.

JUDGE WILSON: And you then went on to say

"Our Intelligence informed us that he had been instructedto lure me to a spot where I would be alone and where I wouldthen be stalked and killed".

Do you remember saying that?

MR MPONDO: Yes.

JUDGE WILSON: Who is your Intelligence who told you this?

MR MPONDO: That's what came from our minds.

JUDGE WILSON: You said your Intelligence, right. Yousay this is what happened, which you've told us nothing aboutat

all in your evidence today, have you?

MR MPONDO: I don't understand the question.

JUDGE WILSON: You have not mentioned anything about himhaving been instructed to lure you to a spot where you would bealone and where you would be stalked and killed. You have saidno word of that, have you?

MR MPONDO: I still don't understand which person youare talking about.

JUDGE WILSON: You in your affidavit, talking about thisman, said

"Our Intelligence informed us that he had been instructedto lure me to a spot where I would be alone and where I wouldthen be stalked and killed".

You went on to say:

"When he was confronted by us with this information heran away and we chased him and then stabbed him".

MR MPONDO: What I said was, this other girl who cameto me at home, and informed me about the two people from the 3million gang who alighted from the kombi. She wanted to makeme aware so that these people cannot lure me to another place.

JUDGE WILSON: That is not what you said. I am readingfrom what was written down by your attorney, was read over toyou and signed by you. I think it is your present attorney whowrote it down. He confirms. He wrote it down as you told him,and what you told him was that when you confronted the deceasedwith the fact that he was going to lure you to some place andkill you he ran away. You have not said one word of that beforeus today, have you?

Can you explain how you told your attorney this completely differentstory?

MR MPONDO: It is one story. I told my lawyer thatthere was a girl who arrived ...

JUDGE WILSON: You did not. I am reading to you what hewrote down and what was read to you and what you signed.

Do you want to read it? Can you explain how you came to tellyour attorney this? How he came to write it down and submit itto us.

MR MPONDO: No, what I told my attorney is that thisother girl told me about the members of the 3 million gang, therewere two, and she said she was just making me aware so that theycouldn't lure me.

JUDGE WILSON: So your attorney does not write a word ofthat down and puts a completely false version, is that what youwould have us believe?

MR MPONDO: I think that was a mistake.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY JUDGE WILSON

MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Mpondo, in your evidence in chief, didn'tyou say that you were informed by Comrade Daniel who came high-spiritedon the 4th May whilst you were with the deceased to tell you thathe had just spotted the deceased inside a kombi full of the 3million gang?

MR MPONDO: Yes, he told me that.

MS KHAMPEPE: And in fact, you did not hear this from theyoung woman who initially approached you to advise you of thevisit of Comrade Tsietsie.

MR MPONDO: No. May I please clarify this. This girlcame before Comrade Daniel arrived and when she arrived she toldme about the two 3 million members who alighted the kombi nearthe church and then Comrade Daniel told me that

he saw a kombi driving past his workplace and it was full of 3million members and he also saw Tsietsie in that kombi that belongedto the 3 million gang.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Mr Mpondo, what exactly did you want tofind out from the deceased?

MR MPONDO: The deceased, as I said before, was a personwho told us that he didn't want to be a member of the 3 milliongang any more, but he went back to them. What I wanted to beclear about was the fact that what made him go back to the 3 milliongang, whilst he came to us and told us that he never wanted tobe a member of the 3 million gang any more.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Before you decided to take him to your comradesand when you were still in the company of the deceased and Danielat your place, did you ask him, the deceased?

MR MPONDO: No, I didn't ask him.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Why didn't you?

MR MPONDO: What I wanted him to clarify before theleaders, I wanted him to clarify this before the leaders, notto me.

JUDGE MGOEPE: And did you have particular leaders in mind?

MR MPONDO: Yes, that is why I told the comrades thatwe have to take him to the leaders.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Did you ever take him to the leaders?

MR MPONDO: I was told that my leaders were at the nightclub. When I went to the nightclub I found the other comrades thereand they chased us away and said to us some of us are going tobe arrested because they were being sought by the police and thenthey told us to leave that place.

JUDGE MGOEPE: When he was stabbed, where were you on theway to?

MR MPONDO: We were on the way to my place.

JUDGE MGOEPE: For what purpose?

MR MPONDO: As we didn't find the other comrades andwe were together with the other comrades. When I am talking aboutthese comrades, I am talking about the leaders, because therewere senior comrades who were not leaders. I thought they werethe ones who would want some clarify from Tsietsie regarding thisissue.

JUDGE MGOEPE: When he was stabbed with the knife, wherewere you on the way, to what place?

MR MPONDO: He was stabbed when he was trying to runaway, when we got him out of the house between the Roman Churchand Witeko(?).

JUDGE MGOEPE: I will try for the third time to put thisquestion. Where were you taking him to?

MR MPONDO: We were taking him to my place.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Did you think you would find some of yourleaders there at your place?

MR MPONDO: That is how we were told by one of the peoplethat they were there at the club. At home there were no leaders. I was taking him home so that we could sit together with him,we and the comrades, and find out from him whether he still wantsto be a member of the 3 million gang or does he want to returnback to the community.

ADV DE JAGER: After the leaders, Dividi and Masusu, waskilled, how long did it take before peace sort of prevailed inthe area?

MR MPONDO: Do you mean after Dividi and Masusu werekilled?

ADV DE JAGER: Yes.

MR MPONDO: This didn't happen immediately thereafter. Masusu was killed first and then Dividi was killed after him. There was still no stability in Maokeng.

ADV DE JAGER: The killing Tsietsie took place about threemonths after the killing of the leaders of the 3 million gang,two and a half months round about, is that correct?

MR MPONDO: No, what I remember is that Dividi was killedwhen Tsietsie had already been killed.

ADV DE JAGER: Was Dividi killed after Tsietsie, afteryou killed Tsietsie?

MR MPONDO: Yes.

ADV DE JAGER: It may be that I've made a mistake. I willcheck on it.

MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Mpondo, how many comrades were there atthe time when the stabbing took place of Tsietsie?

MR MPONDO: When Tsietsie was stabbed, there were somany because we had by that time already met to get us - someof the other community members were there.

MS KHAMPEPE: Are you able to approximate, were you 10,were you 15, were you 20?

MR MPONDO: I think we were more than 20.

MS KHAMPEPE: Now when you make reference to "comrades",are you referring to members of the SDU, are you referring tomembers of the ANC Youth League, are you referring to people whoalso do not belong to either the SDU or the ANC Youth League,who are merely youth within your community?

MR MPONDO: Usually the SDUs were the people I usedto call "Comrade" at that time.

MS KHAMPEPE: So it is only the members of the SDUs who

participated in the stabbing of Mr Tsietsie?

MR MPONDO: No, there were also members of the communitywho took part in the killing of Tsietsie.

MS KHAMPEPE: Why did you participate in the stabbing ofMr Tsietsie?

MR MPONDO: I took part in stabbing Tsietsie becauseTsietsie couldn't tell us the truth and what I wanted to do wasto bring about peace and freedom in the Maokeng Township.

MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Mpondo, you say you participated becauseTsietsie could not tell you the truth. Now, wasn't there anyother means which could have been employed in trying to catchMr Tsietsie and further interrogating him with regard to the truthwhich you wanted to ascertain from him?

MR MPONDO: No, there was no other way we (indistinct)because he had already shown to us that he wasn't honest withus.

MS KHAMPEPE: But now if you say he had already shown thathe was no longer honest with you, whereas the reason why you wantedto catch him was to interrogate him to obtain the truth, whichof the two I am unable to find out exactly, what really promptedyou to participate in the stabbing.

MR MPONDO: I took part in stabbing him because I wasalso a member of the SDU and at that time we were very angry regardingthe way Tsietsie reacted when we asked him questions.

MS KHAMPEPE: How did he react Mr Mpondo when you askedhim questions?

MR MPONDO: When we questioned him he didn't answerus. What he did was to try to run away.

MS KHAMPEPE: And that was sufficient for you to promptyou to stab him.

MR MPONDO: Yes, that decision we took.

MS KHAMPEPE: In your evidence you have stated that youreceived orders from your leaders that you were to protect thecommunity?

MR MPONDO: Yes, it is like that.

MS KHAMPEPE: And how were these orders given to you?

MR MPONDO: We met as the youth of Maokeng and alsoas the youth of the ANC and we decided that because the policeare not acting against the 3 million gang we have to establishour own forces which would protect the nation or the community.

MS KHAMPEPE: When was this meeting whereat you met asa youth and came with that decision?

MR MPONDO: This happened, I think it was in November1990, yes, it was between November and December 1990.

MS KHAMPEPE: And to your knowledge, when did Tsietsiebecome a member of the 3 million gang?

MR MPONDO: I am not sure when he became a member ofthe 3 million gang, but when time went by I came to know him asa member of the 3 million gang.

MS KHAMPEPE: And when did you come to know him as a memberof the 3 million gang, what year was it?

MR MPONDO: We often saw the 3 million gang membersworking(?) here at court. In 1991 I had a case against me whichI was attending, that was a public violence case, and that iswhere I started seeing the 3 million gang members and I also sawTsietsie there.

MS KHAMPEPE: Was he frequently in the company of the 3million gang?

MR MPONDO: Yes.

MS KHAMPEPE: Thank you.

JUDGE WILSON: What were the 3 million gangs doing at

court?

MR MPONDO: I don't know, because they were very popularin town, in every place. You never find them absent in any place. They were full in town.

JUDGE WILSON: Very popular you said. One other point. Can you tell me the names of the people who were with you, themore than 20 people who were with you when you stabbed the deceased?

MR MPONDO: Yes, I remember my two comrades with whomI was from home. It was Comrade Tsediso and Comrade Daniel.

JUDGE WILSON: Daniel who?

MR MPONDO: It was Tsediso Gubuwe and Daniel Mafole(?).

JUDGE WILSON: And who else?

MR MPONDO: I can't remember the others. There wereso many.

JUDGE WILSON: But you had gone looking for them, you hadgone looking for these senior men who were going to assist you. You now say you can't remember any of their names?

MR MPONDO: The comrades I went to look for I didn'tmeet them until I met this other comrades who were at Jackie'sTavern.

JUDGE WILSON: And who were they?

MR MPONDO: They were the members of the SDU.

JUDGE WILSON: I want their names.

MR MPONDO: I can't remember their names fully. Becauseour comrades usually used call names. That is the members ofthe SDU. We usually call them call names like Tsiga, they werestrange names, I can't remember them well.

JUDGE WILSON: You know that if you want to get amnestyyou must make a full and frank disclosure?

MR MPONDO: What I am telling you is the truth.

MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Mpondo, did you not live together withthese members of the SDU, were you not brought up within the sameenvironment?

MR MPONDO: I used to live together with them, but notin one area, because at Pumulung, Pumulung is a very big placeand we were in groups. You find that when we meet I don't knowthem any more. I wouldn't identify this other one's name is thisand so on. We are only a group.

MS KHAMPEPE: How many members of the SDUs stayed in Pumulung?

MR MPONDO: The SDUs were founded on the youth and therewere very many youths at Pumulung.

MS KHAMPEPE: Was every youth in Pumulung a member of theSDU?

MR MPONDO: No.

MS KHAMPEPE: And what proportion of the youth in Pumulungduring your time was affiliated to the SDU unit?

MR MPONDO: It was the youth from Pumulung and otherswere the members of the ANC and others were normally the supportersof the ANC.

MS KHAMPEPE: Let me rephrase my question. What I wantto find out is of the total youth in your time which was in Pumulung,what was the percentage which was affiliated to the SDU? Wasit 50% of the youth during your time who were members of the SDU,was it 10%?

MR MPONDO: I really can't estimate.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Didn't the SDUs, were they not under harassmentby the police?

MR MPONDO: They were harassed by police.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Did they not operate somehow in a

clandestine manner? In a secret manner?

MR MPONDO: They were not secret about anything. Theyused to harass us. They didn't hide themselves.

JUDGE MGOEPE: No, I mean members of SDUs did not theyoperate - because of the harassment of the police, didn't theyoperate in a clandestine manner, in a less open fashion?

MR MPONDO: The members of the SDU, because of the harassmentfrom the police, we were really hiding ourselves. JUDGE MGOEPE: And you used some code names as it were, some of you.

MR MPONDO: Yes.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Was it easy to know everybody who was amember of the SDU?

MR MPONDO: Yes, especially when we have met.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Was it easy to know all the members of theSDU?

MR MPONDO: No.

ADV DE JAGER: Mr Mpondo, I only want to add that you arecorrect. I've made a mistake. The killing of Mr Dividi tookplace after the killing of Tsietsie. You are correct in the answer.

CHAIRMAN: Mr Matsepe, have you any questions to ask?

MR MATSEPE: Do you remember when Adv Mpshe asked you about the form which you filled in. Do you remember when you appliedfor amnesty, you filled in a form?

MR MPONDO: Yes, I remember that.

MR MATSEPE: He asked you about a question which he readto you. This is the question and I will read it in English. It is question 11(b) on this form. Before I ask you this question,I want you to explain who filled in this form for

you. Could you please answer that question first?

MR MPONDO: Comrade Mathabathule helped me to fill inthe form.

MR MATSEPE: It is written here, "Who gave you theinstruction?". I am talking about the first paragraph. In paragraph (a) it says, "Who gave you the instructions?"and you said, "I received this instruction from Petrus Mashabeof 62 Gelukwaarts". And you were asked again, "If so,state the particulars of such an order or such an instruction". When Mashabe explained to you about what is written here, didhe do it in English or in Sotho?

MR MPONDO: He did it in Sotho.

MR MATSEPE: Because here it is written that, "Wasit an order, instructions or an approval?" Therefore myquestion to you is, when you gave Mashabe this answer, that isthe one person who helped you fill in this form. Because it talksabout a person who gave you an instruction, or who gave you theapproval to perpetrate the incident you perpetrated. My questionis, when you answered this question, are you trying to say thatit was Mashabe who said to you on that day, go and kill Leboko,or what were you saying? We perpetrated this murder because ourCommanders like Mashabe would approve it?

MR MPONDO: I was trying to explain that Comrade Mashabewas a Commander, so he was the one who gave us orders to protectthe community from the attacks of the 3 million gang.

MR MATSEPE: Let me ask this question in this way. Wereyou trying to tell the Committee that on the 4th when Leboko waskilled, did Mashabe tell you to kill Leboko?

MR MPONDO: No, I wasn't explaining that.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MATSEPE

ADV DE JAGER: Who completed this form, whose handwritingis it? Could you perhaps have a look?

MR MPONDO: It is Comrade Mashabe Thulu's handwriting.

JUDGE WILSON: Was he also present when you made your supplementaryaffidavit?

MR MPONDO: Yes, he was present.

JUDGE WILSON: Did he also prepare some of this document? That is the introduction and the final remarks about the paperbeing sworn? Did he prepare some of the papers?

MR MPONDO: I am not sure about that. Yes, it is true.

NO QUESTIONS BY MR MPSHE

CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE: s s

MR MATSEPE: Tsediso, I am going to ask you questions inSosotho and I want you to relax, be free. But before I startto put my questions I want to understand exactly. Do you knowwhy are you here? Do you know why we are also here, do you understandthat?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE: Yes, I am listening to you.

MR MATSEPE: I want you to raise your voice so that thepeople here can hear you. I am far from you, I cannot hear you. I want to hear exactly what you are going to say. I requestyou to raise your voice so that I can hear you. Are you awarethat you are not going to be tried here? You are not the accused.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE: Yes, I am aware.

MR MATSEPE: Are you aware that you need to speak the truthabout what happened on that particular day?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE: Yes, I am aware.

MR MATSEPE: That is the day when the deceased was killed.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE: Yes.

MR MATSEPE: Do you know that to be successful with theapplication you have to show it with your evidence that you aregoing to give. That when you did this you were doing it for politicalreasons. I want you to speak audibly because everything is beingtaped. If you nod your head that will not appear on the tape.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE: I am listening, Sir.

MR MATSEPE: Now, do you understand again that the truthwe have to get here is the truth in its fullest?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE: Yes, I am aware.

MR MATSEPE: Before I get to my questions about this incidentwhen the deceased was killed, let me ask this. This person youkilled, what is his name?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE: Bothetsa Sekotome.

MR MATSEPE: Can you please tell us how you knew him?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE: He was a policeman, a municipal policemanhere in Maokeng. Being a policeman I must say I knew him becausewe all stayed in Pumulung.

MR MATSEPE: You knew him just as an ordinary policeman.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE: Yes, he was a policeman.

MR MATSEPE: Did you know him just as a policeman, notin different ways?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE: He was a person who took a lot of partbeing against the members of the SDU.

MR MATSEPE: We've listened to many facts about the situationthat was prevailing here in Maokeng when there was a lot of harassment. We have heard about the killings that took place, or let me sayabout this 3 million gang as well as many other killings thatwere caused by the members of the African National Congress YouthLeague. With this matter, the 3 million, how do you perceivethese members?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE: They were the criminals terrorisingthe community as well as the members of the ANC.

MR MATSEPE: According to you knowledge, is there anythingthat you witnessed that is so wicked in eyes, some of the activitiesthat they were doing to the community?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes.

MR MATSEPE: Explain then.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : It was on the 12th to the 15th December,that was the day when Comrade Mbelwane(?) was killed. That isComrade Mduwisile Mbelwane. We were at the shops. We saw busescoming, buses as well as kombis. We were at the shops at Pumulung. They were together with the members of AZAPO. The police werealso there with these big vans, we used to call it 710.

MR MATSEPE: Where were they?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : The 710 approached from the post officedirection and the kombi was from the tarred road and the bus fromthe 16 Area.

MR MATSEPE: And what happened then?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : The kombi stopped there and the membersof the 3 million alighted. We were in a group as members of theSDU. When they alighted, they came straight to us and that iswhen the 710 approached and the 3 million members, some of themapproached and when we saw them we run to the different directions. Just passing by Mr Qweqwe's house the bus approached us and veryclose to Kanelelo School(?) they alighted. Now they were comingour direction and then we ran towards (inaudible).

MR MATSEPE: What were you running from?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : We were running from the 3 millionbecause we knew them as dangerous people. We knew that they weregoing to kill us.

MR MATSEPE: Did they say they were coming to kill you? Didn't you know that they were coming for peace maybe?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : No, the way they came you could seethat there was just blood stinking, there was no peace at all.

MR MATSEPE: What were they having in their hands thatmade you conclude that they were not peaceful?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : They had pangas and knives.

MR MATSEPE: Could you see those weapons?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes, they didn't hide them. Theywere publicly carried.

MR MATSEPE: Could the police see them?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes, the police were there becausethe 710 that I've just referred to was a police van.

MR MATSEPE: The question is, could the police see them?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes, they could see those weaponsof theirs.

MR MATSEPE: Did the police take any initiative to stopthis that the members were doing?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : No, nothing. That is where ComradeMbuyisile died.

MR MATSEPE: I have finished with that. That was the past. Now at the time of this you were a member of a certain politicalorganisation.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes, I was a member of the ANC YouthLeague.

MR MATSEPE: When did you join this League?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : In 1990, February.

MR MATSEPE: During that time were you schooling?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes. I was at Tabong.

MR MATSEPE: Where is Tabong?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : It is in Welkom.

MR MATSEPE: Now when you were schooling in Tabong, whatdid you want here in Kroonstad?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : This is my hometown. During the holidaysI would be here around.

MR MATSEPE: Your home is here.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes, but I was schooling in Tabong.

MR MATSEPE: Please don't be surprised if I ask you whereTabong is. It is because the members of the Committee not knowwhere Tabong is.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : It is in Welkom.

MR MATSEPE: So that all of us understand what we are talkingabout here. Being a member of the Youth League of the ANC, whowas the leader of the Youth League in Kroonstad?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : It was Comrade Matshabethule. Heused to lead us together with George Daniels, Gashliso, Moaketsi,they were members of the Youth League.

MR MATSEPE: Were you present when the SDUs were formed?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : No, I arrived about two weeks thatthey had been formed.

MR MATSEPE: Did you join these SDUs?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes.

MR MATSEPE: Now being a member of this, before this incidenttook place, have you been sought by the police before?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : No.

MR MATSEPE: The police looking for you where you were?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : No, I can't remember that.

MR MATSEPE: The question is actually whether he was beingsought, looked for by the police, sought after.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Who was being sought by the police,myself or ....

MR MATSEPE: There is evidence, because the police havebeen looking for certain people, members of the SDUs, for differentcases like public violence. I am asking this to get clarity asto whether have you been sought by the police or not?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : No, no police were looking after me.

MR MATSEPE: Now this incident that happened, happenedon the 25th December.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes, that is correct.

MR MATSEPE: And that is a very respected day, ChristmasDay.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes.

MR MATSEPE: I want you to tell the Committee that on thisspecific day, where were you and what happened? How did you killthis person, what happened that you killed him? Remember thatyou have to convince us with your evidence that the incident ispolitically motivated. You can now start.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : We were at Pumulung in Masimung Street(?). We were sitting there, five of us in number. Whilst sitting,we were at a girl's place called Mansu(?). We were right insidethe yard. Now the house is very close to Jack Nose Tavern. AndI left. The other comrades, I went to the Tavern to buy a packetof cigarettes and a packet of Simba chips. Now when I left thatplace I got inside and I met my girlfriend inside this Tavernand I talked to her for a few minutes and I went straight to thecounter. When I came back she was now at the place called Sebengand she was now in this place called Sebeng. It is inside JackNose Tavern. And I went straight to her. And I was asking herwhat does she want there and she said I am here to entertain myselfand I said to her I've been looking for you, where were you andshe said to me no, I've been ...(intervention).

CHAIRMAN: Can we avoid some of this detail or is it reallynecessary for your case?

MR MATSEPE: No, I concur, Mr Chairman. Listen, I wantyou to do this. When I ask you to explain everything, and ifI want that question I'd ask you, but I want you to remember thatthere is a person who has been killed here and his name is Boetie. Now tell us the moment when you decided to kill him.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : While I was in Sebeng Boetie camein and he grabbed me by my clothes and I asked him what are youdoing? Before he could give me an answer Comrade Pasa Kamponde(?)came and he said what's the problem. There was no answer still. He took his gun out and then myself and Pasa ran away, we wentoutside the house. And then when we got outside some of the comradeswere there, Mahawu and Robert Thule and we told them what happened. We told them that Boetie is inside, we don't know what is happeningwith him. He is taking out his gun and we don't have any clashwith him and we left. We went next door to a house belongingto a member of the ANC Women League. The deceased appeared againwith a gun. We were next to Mrs (indistinct) house and then heleft. He got into another house opposite. It was a house belongingto a police called (indistinct) Mutsi. He was still holding hisgun in his hand and we went to him because we realised that hecouldn't see us and at the corner we grabbed him and we stabbedhim with our knives. He ran to the next street, we followed him,we stabbed him and he fell the second house. That's where theincident took place.

MR MATSEPE: We must understand that this incident - whyactually did you decide to stab him?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : It is like this, Sir, if you wantto know. The police, their actions against the people and ourselves,they have given us that idea. The police have been with thisgang called 3 million gang, because some of the police were workingtogether with these 3 million gang people, but they were doingit in disguise. And we only knew one or two of the police, butin most cases we would find out that most of the policemen weresupporting this gang. Because the community of Maokeng triedto report the gang to the police but nothing would be done, andthat is why we decided that the SDUs must be formed, because thepolice have failed in their duty. The 3 million gang was killingpeople and it was robbing in town.

MR MATSEPE: Was the deceased, Boetie, a member of the3 million gang?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : No, he was a member of the PoliceForce.

MR MATSEPE: I am asking was he a member of the 3 milliongang?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : No, I don't have any knowledge ofthat. No. I am not certain.

MR MATSEPE: After you were arrested, were you convicted?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes.

MR MATSEPE: You must realise that Boetie also had a family. This you did unto Boetie, how do you feel about it?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : I am very regretful of what we did,really I am regretful about what I did.

MR MATSEPE: Are there any way words that you can directto his parents or his relatives?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes.

MR MATSEPE: I will ask you again. Are there any wordsthat you can direct to his family? You must understand that youhave taken someone's life away. Someone who was loved by hisfamily. Isn't it?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes, it is like that.

MR MATSEPE: Therefore, are there any words that you candirect to his parents, what can you say to them?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : I would like to say to them, his parentsand the whole family, please forgive me for what I did. It wasn'tmy intention to do that.

MR MATSEPE: When you say it wasn't with your intention,what do you mean, because you took a knife to stab someone. Weren'tyou aiming to kill him?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : No, it was because I was angry. Iwas very emotional at that time because of the situation thatreigned at that time.

MR MATSEPE: When you say you were angry, do you mean youwere very aggravated?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes.

MR MATSEPE: What were you trying to say?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : I was saying I was very emotionalat that time and that is what caused me to do that. We had lostfaith in the police by that time, that is why I took upon myselfto do that.

MR MATSEPE: Was Boetie a member of any political organisationthat was against the African National Congress?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : No, Sir, I won't say he was a memberof any political party. But because of the knowledge that thepast regime was oppressive and the people who worked for thatregime were the people who were against the ANC, especially thepolice. They were really against the ANC at that time.

MR MATSEPE: You said Boetie had a gun on him, what happenedto that gun?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : I don't know what happened to thatgun, but I saw it on the following day on another person.

MR MATSEPE: Didn't you on your own take that weapon?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : No, I didn't.

MR MATSEPE: When you attacked him, did you have any objectiveor intention to take his gun away from him?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : No, our intention was just to killhim because ....

MR MATSEPE: Will you please raise your voice. I can'thear you clearly. What was your intention? Was it to take hislife away?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : When this happened we had lost ourfaith in the police.

MR MATSEPE: Is there anything that you want this Committeeto know which I didn't ask you about which you think maybe isnecessary for the Committee to know?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : I can't understand you. Will youplease repeat your question?

MR MATSEPE: Is there anything that you want the Committeeto know about regarding the testimony you are giving us or maybeanything I didn't ask you about?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes, there is.

MR MATSEPE: Are you finished with your testimony, or isthere anything that you want to say to the Committee?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : If it is necessary yes, they can askme questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MATSEPE

MR MPSHE: We are agreed that the deceased, Boetie, wasnot a member of the SAP.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : I couldn't hear you.

MR MPSHE: We are agreed that the deceased was not a memberof the South African Police. I will repeat the question. Weare agreed that the deceased was not a member of the South AfricanPolice.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : I knew him as a policeman.

JUDGE WILSON: When you say "we" do you meanyourself and counsel for the applicant?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Myself and him.

MR MPSHE: I will repeat the question. Do you have anyproblem in hearing the interpretation to you there?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : No.

MR MPSHE: Mr Chairman, if you will allow me. There isa little misunderstanding here. The applicant did actually respondin Sotho and said I knew him to be a policeman. That's what hesaid in Sotho. And how that is going to be interpreted to theinterviewee I wouldn't know. But we did get an answer.

CHAIRMAN: Will you just record what he has given as hisanswer.

MR MPSHE: Mr Chairman, perhaps he spoke too soft thatI couldn't hear him, because I am listening directly from him. I am not using the overheads.

CHAIRMAN: Quite right.

MR MPSHE: Could you just repeat the answer you have givenplease and speak loud.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : I said I knew Boetie. And I knewhim as a Municipal Policeman.

MR MPSHE: We have listened to applicants yesterday andtoday and none of them ever mentioned the involvement of any otherpolice officers other than the SAPs with the 3 million gang. You are the first person. Do you know why others did not mentionthe other Police Force?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : May you please repeat your question?

MR MPSHE: Just a moment, Mr Chairman. I am trying toget the channel correctly here. I will repeat that question. You are the first person today to tell us about involvement ofother Police Force other than the SAPs. Do you understand that?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes, I am listening.

MR MPSHE: Do you perhaps know the reason why other applicantsdid not mention the other Police Forces?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : No, I don't know.

MR MPSHE: What involvement did the deceased have withthe 3 million gang?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : What I want the Committee to understandis that I didn't say Boetie was a member of the 3 million gang,but I said because we had lost faith in the police here at Maokengand the way in which he acted, that was what gave us the impressionthat he was also one of them according to how he acted, becauseI had no differences with him and the way he approached me inthe Tavern is also the fact that gave me that impression thatmaybe he also has a part that he played in this 3 million gang'sactivities.

MR MPSHE: Before you could stab him, had you establishedanything against him to conclude your mistrust about him?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : As I explained that the police atMaokeng operated in an unfair way. We had nothing against Boetie,or we hadn't proven anything against him or his road(?), but weonly used our minds as people regarding the situation that prevailedin Maokeng.

MR MPSHE: Would I be correct to state that you murderedthis man because he manhandled you in the shop?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : No, it is not like that.

MR MPSHE: Why was he then murdered?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : I have explained, Sir, that the reasonthat caused him to die is that - as I explained that the policewere taking part in many perpetrations here at Maokeng. We didn'tknow all of the policemen who took part in this but accordingto how we saw things happening, the things were happening in frontof our eyes and this is what caused us to lose faith in the police. Because one day whilst we were in town it happened that the 3million gang attacked us, we were from the court, and membersof this gang, when we tried to defend ourselves against them,they ran to the police station and when they ran to the policestation the other policemen came out and these members of thegang had knives in their hands and the police came to us. Andthen we ran into town. That's one of the things which gave usthe impression that the police is really supporting this gang.

MR MPSHE: The deceased was a member of the, if I can callthem, Municipality Police.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes, it is like that.

MR MPSHE: Is that not so?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes, it is like that.

MR MPSHE: At any of the incidents whereat you saw thepolice assisting or being involved with the 3 million gang, didyou ever see members of the Municipality Police?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : No, I won't emphasise that becauseI don't know all of them, I mean the Municipal Police. I takethem all as policemen.

MR MPSHE: Don't the SAPs and the Municipality Police,don't they use different uniforms?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes, they are using different uniforms,but that time I think they were all using blue uniforms that werethe same as the SAP's.

MR MPSHE: Before they could change(?), did you ever seethem in their uniform participating on behalf of the 3 milliongang?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : No, I hadn't seen them.

MR MPSHE: The reason why I am asking you this question. I have a very difficult problem in appreciating the reason whyyou killed this man.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : As I have explained, Sir, becauseof the situation that was reigning in Maokeng and the police activitiesin Maokeng we had already lost faith in the police because theyused to harass us and their activities are the ones which causedus to lose faith in them totally. That is why the deceased endedup dying because we had lost faith in them, because in the wayhe approached us I came to think that maybe he was one of thepolice who worked together with this gang. Maybe his aim wasto kill him, no one would know.

MR MPSHE: Would it then be correct to state that you actedon a mere suspicion?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes, it is true, as I have alreadyexplained.

MR MPSHE: How many of you were present when the deceasedwas stabbed?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : There was three of us.

MR MPSHE: Could you mention names?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes.

MR MPSHE: Who are they?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : It was Robert Toa(?), William Letaboand myself Gubuwe.

MR MPSHE: The other two you have mentioned, were theyconvicted?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes, we were convicted at the SupremeCourt in Bloemfontein and they made an appeal and they were releasedon appeal. Now Robert Toa, who was discharged, I am sorry, RobertToa was discharged before the case was finished and William wasreleased on appeal.

MR MPSHE: You testified that the deceased produced a gunin the shop.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : I want to clarify this before theCommittee. I didn't talk about the shop. It was in the shebeen,that is Jackie's Tavern.

MR MPSHE: You testified that he produced a gun againstyou in the Tavern.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes. That was when Comrade Mpondotook us apart. He drew a gun thereafter.

MR MPSHE: You left and went to a house and he came andentered the neighbouring house. He came again and produced thegun.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes, it is true.

MR MPSHE: Then he went past you still with the gun inhis hand.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes.

MR MPSHE: In what position was he holding this gun whenhe was from the neighbouring house?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : He had pointed it upwards.

MR MPSHE: Will I be correct if I say that at no stagewhen he was moving from the neighbouring house, at no stage didhe ever point this gun towards you.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Do you mean when he came from thehouse next door?

MR MPSHE: Yes.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : No, he couldn't see me because wewere hiding. It was dark in that house where we were in, so hecouldn't see me.

MR MPSHE: You say it was dark.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes. It was at night.

MR MPSHE: Was he moving in the light?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes, because there were lights inthose streets.

MR MPSHE: When he produced this gun for the first timeagainst you in the Tavern, did he say anything to you?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : No, he didn't say anything there. He pulled me by my clothes and I asked him what is happeningand he never answered me, and then (indistinct) Mpondo appearedand took us apart.

MR MPSHE: Did you ever have any trouble with him in thepast?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : No, not at all.

MR MPSHE: Thank you, Mr Chairman, no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MPSHE

JUDGE MGOEPE: Mr Gubuwe, your application form has actuallynot been fully completed as it should have been in terms of theAct. If you had to look at page 4 of your application. You seethat question 10 has not been completed, 10(a) and 10(b) and therest of what follows thereafter.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes, I am aware, Sir.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Why didn't you complete this?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : I had problems because it was writtenin Afrikaans and I don't know Afrikaans.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Let's see whether we can assist you as brieflyas possible. Question 10(a), which you did not complete, asksyou to mention the political objectives which you wanted to achieve.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : We wanted to have the African NationalCongress and we wanted the community to be free, to have a freepolitical activity in Maokeng. Because everything that was happeningin Maokeng was prohibiting ANC in its activities and the ANC couldn'tcanvass for support for Maokeng. Now everything that was happeningin Maokeng Township prohibited the ANC to exist. We couldn'twork properly as the ANC.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Are you saying that that was also the politicalmotivation?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : That is true, Sir.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Did you benefit financially yourself asa result of this killing, did you benefit anything financially?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : No, I never got any financial assistanceor any financial help.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Another question which you did not complete,asks you whether what you did was the result of any instructionsfrom any person?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : That is true, Sir.

JUDGE MGOEPE: You didn't answer that question. Can younow tell us whether you got instructions from anybody to do whatyou did, and if so, who that person is?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : The person is Mr Petrus Matshabetulo(?).

JUDGE MGOEPE: When did he give you such instructions?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : I can't remember the month, but wegot orders. It was in 1990 in December or November.

JUDGE MGOEPE: What was the nature of the instructions?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : The orders were like this. Seeingthat you are the members of the SDU you are there to protect thecommunity and to protect your lives. Now by all means possibleit is your right to protect the Maokeng community so that theycan live peacefully.

JUDGE MGOEPE: If necessary, to kill. Did you understandinstructions as saying that if necessary, in order to protectthe community, you could kill the enemy, or whoever you thoughtwas the enemy?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes, that's true, Sir.

JUDGE MGOEPE: What sentence are you serving now?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : It is nine years.

JUDGE MGOEPE: That is as far as your application formgoes which was not fully completed. Let us turn to the deceased. You have told us that he was a Municipal Policeman, am I right?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes, that is correct, Sir.

JUDGE MGOEPE: What was the nature of the function of theMunicipal Police?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : I don't want to commit myself. Idon't know the nature of their work actually.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Were they in uniform on duty?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Were they armed while on duty?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes. I can say they used to carryguns.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Do you think those guns were weapons thathad officially been issued to them in their capacity as policemen?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : No, I don't have any knowledge ofthat kind of information whether they were given those guns officiallybecause they were police.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Did they carry handcuffs as well?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : No, I've never seen them carryinghandcuffs.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Could they arrest a person if they saw aperson committing an offence?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : I don't know.

JUDGE MGOEPE: What is it that you know about them?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : I knew them as people wearing greenuniform and the one thing that I know is that they would go arounddestroying other people's liquor around. They would go into thehouses and destroy the liquor at shebeens.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Are you aware of the seriousness of yoursituation, the situation in which you are? Do you realise theimportance of this application?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : I realise the seriousness, Sir.

JUDGE MGOEPE: What in your mind did you think was thefunction of the Municipal Police?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : I don't understand your question.

JUDGE MGOEPE: What in your mind did you think was theduty or function of the Municipal Police?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Because they were wearing uniformI would perceive them as police because they were also carryingguns just like the SAP.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Mr Gubuwe, I am trying to, as far as possible,to assist you the fullest opportunity to present your case.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : I am listening to you, Sir.

JUDGE MGOEPE: I am going to ask you again. Did you thinkthat their duty was to sweep the streets or clean the windowsin the townships, or what did you think was their function?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Sir, to tell you the truth, I didn'tknow their function.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Why do you call them policemen? Why doyou call them Municipal Policemen? Why don't you call them municipalcleaners?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : They were called Municipal Police.

JUDGE MGOEPE: And you say to us you don't know as to whetheror not they could arrest a person if he committed an offence.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : That one I cannot elaborate. If itwas their duty to arrest a person they were entitled to, but Idon't want to say anything about the arrests they were supposedto make or not. But I knew for a fact that the SAPs would arrestyou when committing a crime. You'd see them guarding the tavernsetc.

JUDGE MGOEPE: If you are not even able to tell us whetheror not they could arrest a person for whatever offence, why wouldyou be angry with them for not helping put down the problems causedby the 3 million gang?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Can you repeat your question, Sir?

JUDGE MGOEPE: I've asked you many times whether you didnot think that Municipal Police could arrest a person for committingan offence and each time you said to me that you did not knowthat. I don't understand therefore as to why you could blamethe Municipal Police for not doing something about the 3 milliongang if you don't even know that they were supposed to arrestanybody for committing an offence.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : When we come to the issue of the 3million gang, it is one of the things that convinced me becausethey couldn't arrest anybody from the 3 million gang when committingcrime, because things have been happening in the presence of everybody,even the police, but nobody could help. Senator Dennis Bloemcan be my witness that one day it was a funeral of Sono. We werebuilding a tent. While building this tent people said to us the3 million gang has stopped people at the taxi rank, the peoplewho are heading for Pumulung cannot go home because the 3 milliongang is stopping them to do that. We went to the rank and wefound them there and the police station was very close to thetaxi rank. When we arrived they ran to the police station, theycame back with the police and then we ran away, we took the kombi,we went back to the township. When we got to the old townshipthe police arrived and they said we are the SAPs, they pickedus up we went to the police station. Senator Bloem arrived atthe police station and he complained to the police. He said theseare the comrades. The 3 million gang is busy robbing people,stopping the people from doing their activities.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Sorry, you are busy rattling on. I am notasking you and I haven't asked you anything about the South AfricanPolice. I am going to restrict and I am still restricting myselfto Municipal Police. What did you expect the Municipal Policeto do with regard to the 3 million gang?

JUDGE MGOEPE: If they were the real police, if they werepolice they would arrest them for what they were doing.

JUDGE MGOEPE: That is exactly what I am not asking you. I am asking you what did you expect the Municipal Police to do?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : To arrest them.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Was it part of their function to arrestpeople then who commit offences?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : I don't have any idea as to whetherwas it their task to arrest people.

JUDGE MGOEPE: You see, you may be blaming people - you

might have blamed the deceased wrongly. You might have beenangry against the deceased wrongly. Maybe it was not his functionto do what you thought he should do. Sorry, you have no commenton that?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Was it a question or was it a comment,Sir?

JUDGE MGOEPE: Let me just put it to you this way. Whydid you kill this man?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : I have already explained, Sir, thatthe deceased was killed because the police was involved in everythingand we mistrusted them.

JUDGE WILSON: As I understand your evidence, you wentinto the shebeen and there much to your surprise you saw yourgirlfriend. Is that so?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes, that is correct, Sir.

JUDGE WILSON: And you were having words with her aboutwhat she was doing there.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : That's correct, Sir.

JUDGE WILSON: She said she was entertaining herself.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : That's correct.

JUDGE WILSON: And I gathered that you then said well,you have been looking for her. Were you annoyed when you foundher there?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : No, I was not annoyed.

JUDGE WILSON: What time was it?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : I cannot remember the time, but itwas late, towards nine o'clock.

JUDGE WILSON: And while you were having words with yourgirlfriend, the deceased came up.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : That's correct.

JUDGE WILSON: And he joined the two of you and got involvedwith you.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes, he just grabbed me by my clothes.

JUDGE WILSON: Is that what made you cross that he didthis in front of your girlfriend?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : No, that is not the reason.

JUDGE WILSON: Wasn't it a very annoying thing for someman to come and grab you like that for no reason at all?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes, that was very annoying, but youknow not to an extent of killing him.

JUDGE WILSON: Then he produced a gun.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : That's correct.

JUDGE WILSON: And you had to get out of the shebeen.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes.

JUDGE WILSON: Did you leave your girlfriend behind?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : That's correct.

JUDGE WILSON: With him, he was still there.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes, I left the two of them behind.

MS KHAMPEPE: Mr Gubuwe, you have testified that you knewthe deceased because you both stayed in Pumulung.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : That's correct.

MS KHAMPEPE: How long had you both been staying in thesame area prior to his death on the 25th December 1991?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : I knew Boetie in 1991, that was thesame year. It wasn't even over a year that I've known him.

MS KHAMPEPE: How long in terms of months, Mr Gubuwe? Had you just known him for a day before you killed him? Had youknown him for a week, for a month, two months? If you could assistus with an estimation of the period?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : It can be a period of seven to sixmonths.

MS KHAMPEPE: You've also further testified that you gotthe order from Mr Thulu.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : That's correct.

MS KHAMPEPE: And the order you got was in December 1990,is that correct, from Mr Thulu?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : That's correct.

MS KHAMPEPE: And what is the precise nature of the orderthat you got from Mr Thulu in December 1990?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : He said as the members of the SDUswe are there to protect the community in all respects so thatthe people in Maokeng can live safely. So that they can takepart in political activities in a rightful way.

MS KHAMPEPE: And you murdered the deceased in compliancewith that order, is that correct?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : That's correct.

MS KHAMPEPE: There is only one thing which is puzzlingme, Mr Gubuwe, why did you have to wait for seven months to executean order from your Commander? Can you explain that to us?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : What I want the Committee to knowis that the person who gave us a command, he didn't say go andkill the policeman. He was speaking from the knowledge that healready had and he knew that the police were involved in the violencearound Maokeng and not only a few police, it was a group of police,and we didn't know of the time and the place where the enemy wouldbe but now when the enemy approaches you have to act.

MS KHAMPEPE: But Mr Gubuwe, you knew for seven monthswhere the enemy was and you didn't attack? Didn't you know forseven months where the deceased was whom you perceived as theenemy?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : I didn't take the deceased as myenemy for the seven months because we've never exchanged wordswith him.

MS KHAMPEPE: When did you know him to be a Municipal Policeman? When did you first become aware that he was a Municipal Policeman?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : I saw him wearing a uniform.

MS KHAMPEPE: And when was that?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : It was about June/July 1991.

MS KHAMPEPE: You must have held meetings as SDU membersfrom time to time.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : That's correct.

MS KHAMPEPE: And presumably during those meetings youwould discuss your programmes of action, would I be correct inassuming that?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : That's correct.

MS KHAMPEPE: Had you ever discussed with your membersyour intention to kill Mr Gubuwe as soon as you discovered thathe was a member of the Municipal Police?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Can you please repeat your question?

MS KHAMPEPE: Did you at any stage discuss with the membersof the SDU in the many meetings you might have held of your intentionto kill Mr Gubuwe because he was a Municipal Policeman?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : No. We've never discussed anythingin the meeting that he should be killed.

MR MATSEPE: Mr Chairman, if you will allow me. I understandthe question to be Mr Gubuwe who was killed.

MS KHAMPEPE: No, it is the wrong name. I intended tomean the applicant. Thank you. Do you still maintain your answernow that I have been corrected by your counsel? You understandthe question?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : I would like you to repeat your question?

MS KHAMPEPE: Do you still give us the same answer in viewof the correction given by your counsel that you never discussedthe issue of killing the deceased with other members of the SDU?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : I am still giving that answer; we'venever discussed.

MS KHAMPEPE: When did you become a member of the SDU?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : In 1990. In December.

MS KHAMPEPE: During that period are you aware of any killingsthat members of the SDU might have been involved in, insofar asthe police were concerned?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Are you referring to the time whenI joined the SDU?

MS KHAMPEPE: Yes.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : No, I wasn't aware because I havejust been from Tabong in Welkom.

MS KHAMPEPE: Prior to the killing on the 25th December1991, had you become aware of any killings made pursuant to theorders given by Mr Thulu, which killings were made by the membersof the SDUs?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : December 1991?

MS KHAMPEPE: December 1991, prior to the death of Mr Gubuwe,or prior to the death of the deceased.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Can you please repeat the full question?

MS KHAMPEPE: Between the time you joined the SDU, whichis in 1990, until the time when the deceased was killed, are youpersonally aware of any killings made by members of the SDU againstmembers of the police in general?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : No, I don't remember of any memberskilling the police in general.

MS KHAMPEPE: Thank you, Mr Gubuwe.

MR MATSEPE: Thank you, Mr Chairman. Mr Gubuwe, I wouldlike you to listen attentively to this one. You are remindedof the reason why we are here, then I think you will realise thatyour application here, we have not established who helped youto fill in your statement as it is filled in in Afrikaans. Whohelped you to do this?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : That application form was given tome by kolonel Els and I filled it in on my own, but because Icouldn't deal with Afrikaans and I was given limited time, becausethe fax arrived while I was still in gaol on the day I made myapplication and my application was urgently needed and they giveme the Afrikaans application and I told kolonel Els that I can'treally go (indistinct) because I am dealing with this in Afrikaansand then he said there is no time and he faxed the application.

MR MATSEPE: Is this Afrikaans your own Afrikaans whichyou wrote with your own hand?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes, I am the person who wrote there.

MR MATSEPE: Is this Afrikaans written here written byyou?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes.

MR MATSEPE: Here you explain about - if you will justallow me, Mr Chairman. Because you see you have been asked hereas to why you killed Boetie and whether you knew what the dutyof the Municipal Police was. If you say somebody is a policeyou know what a policeman must do. Do you know what is a policeman?

CHAIRMAN: I don't think you have any doubt about that,surely.

MR MATSEPE: I will concede it, but what I wanted to findout from the applicant, just for clarity for our purposes, I thinkit will get clear what I am trying to get. If the Chairman canjust allow me to ask my next question. With your permission,Sir. Let's forget about Boetie now. Did you perceive the policeas enemies to the community, or did you perceive them to be onthe part of the community during these activities?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : I perceived them as the enemies tothe community.

MR MATSEPE: Did you perceive Boetie as a Municipal Police?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes.

MR MATSEPE: Did you see him as a police even though hewas a Municipal Police?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes.

MR MATSEPE: I have no further questions, Mr Chairman.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MATSEPE

MR MPSHE: Mr Gubuwe, I am going to refer to your applicationform, page 3 thereof. I will read what you said in Afrikaans. You said "Hy", and I want to believe here the "hy"was the deceased, "Hy het die 3 miljoen bendelede ook beskerm". Do you understand that?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : May you please repeat the questionor what you have just said.

MR MPSHE: In English you are saying, the deceased wasprotecting the members of the 3 million gang.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : No. I cannot hear you. No, I don'tcarry any knowledge of that.

MR MPSHE: I am going to request Mr Gubuwe to speak loudwhen you answer me, please. You testified when your counsel askeda question about the application form, you testified to the effectthat this is your handwriting. Just remember that.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes.

MR MPSHE: Which means that what is written here is whatwas said by yourself or what comes from you.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes.

MR MPSHE: Now I want you to look again now at this sentencethat I have quoted, the sentence wherein you say he, I want tobelieve it was the deceased, was protecting members of the 3 milliongang, do you see that?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes.

MR MPSHE: Please speak loud.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes. I can see that.

MR MPSHE: What is it which you experienced or have seenof the deceased for you to conclude that he was protecting the3 million gang?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : According to the way he approachedhim, I thought he was protecting them.

MR MPSHE: The manner in which he came to you then youbelieved that he was protecting the 3 million gang?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes, because he said nothing to me. I asked him what was his reason. He never gave me a reason. As soon as he saw me he drew out his gun. And I didn't thinkhe wanted to kill me.

MR MPSHE: At that moment were you involved in a fightor a scuffle with any member of the 3 million gang, the time whenthe deceased came on the scene?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : No, I didn't fight with any of the3 million gang members.

MR MPSHE: Now how can you say the manner of his approachshowed that he was protecting the 3 million gang member?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : May I speak? This person was askedwhat was the reason for him to scuffle me and he never answered. All he did was that he drew out his gun.

MR MPSHE: Mr Gubuwe, to save time, I take it that youdon't want to answer my question. Let's proceed to the next one,the same paragraph.

ADV DE JAGER: Mr Mpshe, sorry, could I just find out. Who helped you to complete this form? Or who told you what towrite in the form?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : I was with Koot de Ring(?)

ADV DE JAGER: And did he tell you what to write in theform?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : No, he was only helping me with Afrikaans.

MR MPSHE: Just to make a follow-up on that. If he washelping you in the Afrikaans language, will I be correct to saythat the idea is yours? The answers are yours.

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes, he only helped me in the Afrikaanslanguage.

MR MPSHE: Correct. If you move further down on that sameparagraph, I will quote, "Ons was ses lede van die YouthLeague". Do you see that?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes, I can see that.

MR MPSHE: Earlier on I recall I asked you a question asto how many were you when you attacked him, do you remember that?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes.

MR MPSHE: You said to me you were three, do you rememberthat?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : Yes. The people who perpetrated theincident were three. But when things started we were about five.

MR MPSHE: Let's continue on that sentence, the spiritof the sentence. "Ons was ses lede van die Youth Leaguesaam toe ons hom op straat ontmoet". How do you explainthat one?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : No. What I know is that we were fivewhen we met on the street, but the people who perpetrated thisincident were three.

MR MPSHE: Did you meet him in the street, did you meetthe deceased in the street?

MR TSEDISO GUBUWE : No, I saw him on the street; whenhe got out of the house, we got out after him, and then we methim at the corner. That is where we met him.

MR MPSHE: My question is so simple. Did you meet thedeceased in the street?

QUESTION:: I cannot gainsay that. You say "ons hethard teenoor hom gehaat omdat baie van ons lede deur hulle gedoodis". He say we hated him, free translation, because manyof our members were killed by them. Who is this them? ANSWER: What I would ask is, I don't understand Afrikaans at all andthe person who was helping me to write maybe he can understandwhat I was saying because I never talked about hatred. Maybethe person who helped me with the Afrikaans is the one who canunderstand me.

JUDGE MGOEPE:: Mr Gobuwe, in your answer to what Mr Matsepeasked you, you said you regarded the police as an enemy?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Did I understand you to mean that you alsoregarded Minister of Police as an enemy?

ANSWER:: Everyone was a policeman sir.

QUESTION:: Including Minister of Police, that I'm askingyou?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: My question really is why did you regard Ministerof Police as an enemy?

ANSWER:: These people sir according to how things happenedat Maokeng that is what made me perceive them as enemies becausethey were not able to help us when we were being attacked by theThree Million Gang. So such people I perceived them as enemies,especially because they were wearing uniforms and they had gunson them, so that meant that they were able to protect us and especiallybecause people who were dying had never committed any offencebut they couldn't do that, they couldn't help us out.

JUDGE WILSON:: You've been asked quite a lot about thisparagraph in your application. I think to make it more sensible,I want to put another sentence to you. The second sentence ofthat paragraph reads

"Dit was algemeen bekend aan ons dat hy (dis die beskuldigde)in meeloper was van die Drie Miljoen Bende wie baie lede van dieANC, SANCA en publiek vermoor het."

Can you read that there? Do you see that there, the secondsentence? That's what you put in your application form, thatthe deceased was known to you.

ANSWER:: May you please repeat your question?

QUESTION:: Did you say, you have said, do you agree youhave said in the application form, it's in front of you now

"Dit was algemeen bekend aan ons dat hy 'n meeloper wasvan die Drie Miljoen Bende wie baie lede van die ANC, SANCA enpubliek vermoor het."

You said that in your application form. It was after that yousaid:

"Hy het die Drie Miljoen Bende lede ook beskerm."

Is that so?

ANSWER:: No I didn't say such things the way they wereput, I think it's because I don't know Afrikaans, maybe this personwho was writing may have been Afrikaans, he couldn't understandme well.

MR DE JAGER:: The person helping you was Mr Doree, orwhat was his name?

ANSWER:: Yes it was Coert Doree.

QUESTION:: Was he a former policeman?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Was he the special policeman that was sentto arrest or to assist with the solution of the Three MillionGang people?

ANSWER:: Yes I believe so sir.

QUESTION:: Is he in jail now?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Do you know why he's in jail?

ANSWER:: No I don't know.

MR MATSEPE:: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman if youcould just allow me this, I think there's a very serious misunderstandhere which I really would like to clarify, I think in the interestof the applicant here.

CHAIRMAN:: Proceed.

MR MATSEPE:: You remember I asked you about who has beenwriting here or who wrote on this statement of yours?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: I asked you whether it is your Afrikaans thatis written here, do you remember?

ANSWER:: Yes I do remember.

QUESTION:: Then you said yes, did you understand me wellat that time?

ANSWER:: Maybe I didn't understand you well at that time. QUESTION: I want the Committee to understand clearlyhere what is happening. I am going to read what is written hereand you must listen to me, but please don't listen to the audiencethey, listen to me because this is very important. I am goingto read it the way it is written, please look at it there on thetable. The second sentence reads thus, I'll read it as it iswritten in Afrikaans, tell me whether you understand what is writtenhere

"Dit was algemeen bekend..."

My question to you is this "dit was algemeen bekend".

ANSWER:: I can't understand you in Afrikaans.

QUESTION:: Can you please listen attentively, I want theCommittee to understand you. Don't be scared no one is goingto intimidate you. When I say in Afrikaans

"It was generally known..."

do you know what I mean when I say that?

ANSWER:: I don't know what you mean in Afrikaans becauseI can't understand this language.

QUESTION:: In other words you can't hear what I'm saying?

ANSWER:: Yes.

CHAIRMAN:: Very well, thank you very much. You are excused,you can go down.

WITNESS IS EXCUSED

MR MPSHE:: Mr Chairman there is still one other applicantto be called, but due to time constraints I would move that weadjourn until tomorrow morning, if possible at 9:30.

COMMISSION ADJOURNS

ON RESUMPTION

(WITNESS NAME NOT GIVEN NOR THAT OF EXAMINER)

QUESTION:: Now for your application to be accepted orto be successful, you have to show with your evidence and maybesome of your witnesses that your act was politically motivated. Do you understand me?

ANSWER:: Yes I do.

QUESTION:: That your application should be successfulyou should prove, and you should show remorse by telling the truthhere. In other words you have to open up your chests and youtell us everything that you did, without hiding anything. Doyou understand?

ANSWER:: Yes I do.

QUESTION:: If the Committee is satisfied that you've openedyour mind and that this incident you did was because of politicalsituations, then the Committee will decide. Do you understand?

ANSWER:: Yes I do.

QUESTION:: Let's start here. How old are you?

ANSWER:: I'm 26 years old.

QUESTION:: At the time of this incident how old were you?

ANSWER:: I was 22 years old.

QUESTION:: At the time of the incident, let me give youthe dates so that we understand each other. In your applicationletter you said this incident happened on 30 October 1992?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: When this thing happened, tell the Committeewere you working or were you a student?

ANSWER:: I was a student.

QUESTION:: Where?

ANSWER:: At Wodibeng(?).

QUESTION:: Which standard?

ANSWER:: Std 7.

QUESTION:: Before I carry on, just briefly tell us wherewere you born, where did you grow up?

ANSWER:: I was born in Kopies and I grew up in Kopiesfor about 12 years. In 1982 we moved to Maokeng, Kroonstad.

QUESTION:: At the time of the incident where your parentsalive?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Are they stil alive?

ANSWER:: Yes they are still alive.

QUESTION:: Now in 1992 we have listened to evidence thatthere was a prevailing situation here that was caused by the conflictsbetween the African National Congress Youth League and the peoplewho called themselves the "Three Million". Do youknow those?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Now let's start with the African National Congress. Do you know African National Congress, do you know what it is?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: At the time of the incident were you a memberor did you affiliate to any political organisation?

ANSWER:: Yes, African National Congress.

QUESTION:: Were you a member of this Organisation or wereyou a leader in this Organisation?

ANSWER:: I was a member of this African National CongressYouth League.

QUESTION:: I want to know from you were you a member ofthe ANC Youth League?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: In this Youth League what was your role?

ANSWER:: I was a member of the SDU.

QUESTION:: When did you join this Youth League?

ANSWER:: In 1987.

QUESTION:: When you started joining this Youth League,were you trained for political reasons?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: One of the training as regards political mattersis it possible for you to give us the directions you were trainedin that made you to be so energetic in working for this ANC, thisLeague. The first one?

ANSWER:: We were taught that the black people are not,we are not recognised and our voice is not heard and then we willhave to fight for ourselves with an organisation so that we, asblack people, we can be heard.

QUESTION:: Remember in 1990 when these organisations wereunbanned, in other words the organisations that were banned beforelike the Pan Africanist Congress, African National Congress andothers. When the were unbanned, did you realise that you cannow freely operate in political matters without any oppression?

ANSWER:: No oppression was still there.

QUESTION:: I'm asking do you still remember those days?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Do you still remember the days when our PresidentMandela was released in 1990?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: In other words you had already interest inpolitics then?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Briefly tell us what were you actually doingwithin the self-defence units, now these self-defence units thatyou've talked about. What were you actually supposed to do?

ANSWER:: As the self-defence units we were there to protectthe community against the oppression and from the gangsters thatwere against the community.

QUESTION:: You understand that a teacher's work is toteach, a preacher's work is to preach in the church. What wasyour role in this self-defence unit?

ANSWER:: It was to protect the community as well as ourselves.

QUESTION:: Was it to protect the community against what?

ANSWER:: Against the harassment from the Three MillionGang.

QUESTION:: What was the Three Million Gang doing?

ANSWER:: This gang was harassing and killing the ANC followersand innocent people.

QUESTION:: You say they were harassing the ANC members,now I want you to explain you as a member of this SDU, was therea case where you were personally harassed or where they triedto hurt you, the members of Three Million?

ANSWER:: Yes they have been searching for me but theycouldn't find me. They went to my home but they couldn't findme, they ended up harassing my brother who is now on a wheelchair.

QUESTION:: Explain what happened to Sugudu, your brother,who is now on a wheelchair, explain was he already on a wheelchairwhen he was harassed?

ANSWER:: Yes he was already on a wheelchair.

QUESTION:: What was he suffering from?

ANSWER:: He collided with a car and he was injured onthe spinal cord.

QUESTION:: What sort of harassment did he get?

ANSWER:: They stabbed him with knives.

QUESTION:: Where?

ANSWER:: They stabbed him three wounds.

QUESTION:: Do you still remember where did they stab him?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Why were they stabbing him, what happened?

ANSWER:: They arrived there searching for myself and mylittle brother.

QUESTION:: When you say they arrived there, what do youmean?

ANSWER:: The arrived at his place where he stays.

QUESTION:: What did they say?

ANSWER:: They wanted me, Molifi Sokatse Kudu and TslathaSukudu, which is Mohahleli, and he said to them these people arenot here and they got into the house to search for themselves,they couldn't find us and they started stabbing him.

QUESTION:: In which year?

ANSWER:: It was early in 1992, at about February month.

QUESTION;: Which month?

ANSWER:: It was about February month.

QUESTION:: That is when this thing happened?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Now these people that harassed your brother,who were those people?

ANSWER:: These were the Three Million Gang members.

QUESTION:: How do you know that they were the Three Millionthat harassed your brother?

CHAIRMAN:: Am I right in thinking that the victim in thisparticular case, the victim in this tragic matter in respect ofwhich the applicant wants application, had nothing to do withthe Three Million Gang? If that is so, I'm not stopping you fromgoing into the details of the Three Million Gang, maybe you maycare to explain to us what the relevance of the Three MillionGang is when the victim in this case had nothing to do with theThree Million Gang?

ATTORNEY:: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman what I'mtrying to achieve here is to set the scene by giving the backgroundof the life that the accused, that is the applicant here led beforehe committed the crime that he committed later on. Inasmuchas I have to lead evidence of the applicant's upbringing and I'mof the view that maybe it might help the Committee to understandbetter his psychological make-up at the time when the offencewas committed. I am hoping to round off this line of questioningto get to the actual deed, which will not take a long time fromnow.

QUESTION:: And then they assaulted your brother, theyharassed him and thereafter were you sought by the police?

ANSWER:: No.

QUESTION:: You ended up staying in a place called "theold location" here in Kroonstad?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: That is during the time when this incidenttook place?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: I want you to explain to the Committee whydid you go and stay in that old township?

ANSWER:: That is a township where we would go, it wasclose to Gelukwaarts, you must know that some of the SDU memberswe left on Saturday running away from the police and we went tothe old township.

QUESTION:: Why were you running from the police?

ANSWER:: They were linking us with a case for a ThreeMillion Gang who was murdered.

QUESTION:: Was it a murder case?

ANSWER:: Yes it was a murder case.

QUESTION:: You ran to the old township?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Now I want you to explain to this Committeewhile you were still at the old location how long did you staythere in hiding before this incident? This happened on 30 October1992.

ANSWER:: I would stay a day in a place and run away toa different place for a day, just running away from the police.

QUESTION:: Thank you. Tell us about the incident whereyou met the deceased?

ANSWER:: It was on a Saturday on 30 October 1992, we wererunning from Gelekwats, I was together with my two compatriots. We were heading for the old location. When we arrived at theold location we alighted from a taxi but on our way into the oldtown, location, we met a white person in there and when we metthis white person, because he was a white person and we are beingsought by the white people, I saw, I just saw an enemy by seeingthis white person.

QUESTION:: I want you to explain a few things accordingto what you have just said now. You were with people?

ANSWER:: I was together with two compatriots.

QUESTION:: Their names?

ANSWER:: It's Pusa Pule Radaki.

QUESTION:: This white person when you met him, did youknow this white person?

ANSWER:: No.

QUESTION:: Was it your first time to see the white person?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: What time was it?

ANSWER:: It was about past 12, to 1.

QUESTION:: During the day, in the evening?

ANSWER:: During the day.

QUESTION:: You approached this person?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Did you talk with him?

ANSWER:: As I was wearing a combat jacket leather withANC flags and badges he said it seems as if you are a leader ofthese people and what he said gave me an indication that he wasone of the people looking for me.

QUESTION:: I am saying did he say anything to you or yousaid anything to him?

ANSWER:: No I didn't say anything to him.

QUESTION:: But did he say anything to you?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: And from there the decision that you took thatyou want to assault this person, when did you take that decision? Did you take the decision at that moment?

ANSWER:: Can you please repeat your question?

QUESTION:: You now meet this white person and you seethis person for the first time, he's unknown to you, he did nothingto you, you approached them and then I asked you did you speakto him and you answered me. Now the next question is you decidedto assault him, did you take that decision at that moment whileyou were still with him or was it a pre-planned thing?

ANSWER:: No this thing happened the minute I met him,it was because of the white people harassing the black peoplein the townships.

QUESTION:: I now understand, you took the decision atthat moment. Explain to this Committee what you did to thatperson?

ANSWER:: I took out my knife and I stabbed him three holesand he ran away and then I couldn't catch him, I went back tothe base.

QUESTION:: Were you intending to kill him by stabbinghim?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: What did you do thereafter?

ANSWER:: I then (indistinct) and he ran away and I wentback to the base where we used to hide away from the police.

QUESTION:: You were convicted?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Now in your murder charge for killing the deceasednow in this case, did you plead guilty?

ANSWER:: No.

QUESTION:: But you were found guilty?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Don't you know the deceased as being a memberof the Three Million Gang?

ANSWER:: No.

QUESTION:: Didn't you know the deceased as a person whowas involved with the police?

ANSWER:: Meeting him as a white person and the talk thathe said to me I perceived him he was a police at that time.

QUESTION:: Now let me ask you this question straight becauseit's a simple question and try to give me a very short version. Why did you kill the deceased?

ANSWER:: At that moment I was looking at my enemy.

QUESTION:: I want to know what was happening in your mind,why do you see a person, you should have met many people on thatday who were not your enemies, now why did you see the deceasedas your enemy?

ANSWER:: The police were looking for me, especially thewhite police. Now to see a white person in the township I sawmy enemy.

QUESTION:: You saw the deceased as the enemy because ofthe stand you took in politics?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Why do you say that? Remember this AfricanNational Congress Organisation was teaching the people that SouthAfrica belong to everybody who lives in it, blacks and white,now why did you see this white person as this person to harass?

ANSWER:: My stand in politics, I was still a young andmy understanding was still young. The decision that I took wasbecause of the experience that I had, I thought by doing thatit would be an indication to the existing system.

QUESTION:: Now this vision from the ANC that all of usare God's children and we have to respect each other, blacks andwhite, have you realised that the ANC was preaching non-racialism?

ANSWER:: I was not yet aware at that time but any whiteperson I regarded as my oppressor, that was the standard I wasin politics.

QUESTION:: I see here in your application form you usethe word "racism".

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Before I ask you about this racism word I wantto know from you whose handwriting is this?

ANSWER:: It's my handwriting.

QUESTION:: Now the English that is written here is ityour English written here?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Now the word "racism", do you understandthe word?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: How do you understand this word "racism"?

ANSWER:: It is separation, it is discrimination againstother people in race.

QUESTION:: The deceased was living amongst the black people,do you know that?

ANSWER:: No.

QUESTION:: Where did you know him staying?

ANSWER:: No I didn't know where he was staying, I didn'teven know him.

QUESTION:: Did you end up knowing his name?

ANSWER:: Yes after I was charged I was told his name andI was found guilty.

QUESTION:: Did you end up knowing where he stayed beforeyou stabbed him?

ANSWER:: No, before I stabbed him I did not know wherehe was staying.

QUESTION:: Listen carefully, after stabbing him, afteryou were convicted you ended up knowing where he was staying.

ANSWER:: Yes, I was told that he was a person who usedto walk around the old township.

QUESTION:: Was he not staying there?

ANSWER:: No I was never told of that, I didn't hear that.

QUESTION:: Yesterday before you went back to prison youmet a white person here, is that so?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Now this white person spoke to you?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Did she tell you who she was?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Who did she say she was?

ANSWER:: She said she was the mother of the deceased,the person I am appearing before the Committee and she said hisname was Thabo and she said she knew that, who killed her sonand she was really asking for forgiveness for me and I also askforgiveness from her.

QUESTION:: Now you are in front of the Committee and youmet the deceased's mother, what do you say to this Committee thenabout that incident that you did?

ANSWER:: Before the Committee I would like to say I amreally sorry, I am asking for forgiveness everything happenedbecause of political reasons.

MR ?:: For record purposes Mr Chairman I want to put iton record that the person referred to by the applicant as beingthe mother to the deceased is one Cornelia Grobbelaar, she wasindeed present yesterday. I spoke to her, I explained her rightsto her and she indicated to me that she's not interested to comeback here today but she knows what her rights are. So she isnot present in the hall today but she was yesterday. Thank youMr Chairman.

CHAIRMAN:: Thank you.

QUESTION:: Mr Sukudu who was the leader or the commanderof the SDU?

ANSWER:: Petrus Machabi Tulo(?).

QUESTION:: Who was the leader of the ANC Youth League?

ANSWER:: It was also Petrus Machabi Tulo.

QUESTION:: You testified that the Three Million Gang washarassing and killing members of the ANC, including innocent people? My question to you is how many ANC members were killed?

ANSWER:: It was more than 20.

QUESTION:: I remember the last one who was killed wasSiti Tsephasa?

QUESTION:: No I don't a long time has passed since then.

QUESTION:: Was your brother who was confined to a wheelchaira member of the ANC?

ANSWER:: He was normally a supporter, no not a member.

QUESTION:: It is at one stage you moved to the old Maokengtownship, for how long did you stay there?

ANSWER:: I explained that on that day I was running fromGeluk.....running to the old township it was on a Saturday.

QUESTION:: For how long did you stay in the old Maokengtownship?

ANSWER:: I never stayed there for a long time, I justwent there because I was running from the police. It was thefirst time that I ran to that place, we usually change place andon that Saturday it was the first time I went to hide at the oldlocation.

QUESTION:: For one day and then moved?

ANSWER:: I didn't stay it was only on that day when Iwent to that location when this incident happened that broughtme here before the Committee.

QUESTION:: Who are these other people you were with onthe day of this incident, the other comrades you referred to?

ANSWER:: It was my two compatriots, the one was Sidneyand the other was Pula Pusa Mlanane.

QUESTION:: Did they participate in the killing of Mr Grobbelaar?

ANSWER:: No.

QUESTION:: Do we understand you to be saying that youon your own and alone left them and attacked the deceased?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: You told us that the deceased spoke to you,remember that?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: What did he say to you?

ANSWER:: He asked me that, he said to me I look like aleader of the people I was with.

QUESTION:: What had prompted him to say that?

ANSWER:: I think it was that combat leather jacket thatI was wearing which had ANC flags on it.

QUESTION:: Is that after you had gone to him yourself?

ANSWER:: No he first came to me.

QUESTION:: You saw him at 12 hours and you approachedhim?

ANSWER:: I explained that at about 12 o'clock we alightedfrom the taxi and we enter in the old location and that is whenhe was coming from the other direction and he talked to me onthe spot where we met and when he talked to me I didn't respondI only drew out my knife and stabbed him.

QUESTION:: When this man, the deceased, asked you whetheryou are the leader of the ANC you produced a knife and stabbedhim?

ANSWER:: Yes I stabbed him I didn't respond to his question.

QUESTION:: That is what caused you to kill him, the questionthat he asked you?

ANSWER:: What he said to me caused me to think that hewas also one of my enemies and that is what made me to kill him.

QUESTION:: Did you ascertain whether he was one of thewhite men who were looking for you?

ANSWER:: No I didn't ascertain that.

QUESTION:: You concluded from his question and then youstabbed him?

ANSWER:: Yes because he was a white person.

QUESTION:: So if you see a white, why do you say you didthat because he was a white person?

ANSWER:: My political understanding at that time toldme that all white people were my enemies.

QUESTION:: Am I correct to state that you killed thisman simply because he was a white person?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: You testified that you stabbed him thrice andhe fled?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: You were told by your counsel, reminding youof the purpose of this gathering and reminding you of the criminaltrial, at the criminal trial was a postmortem report been shownto you?

ANSWER:: I don't understand the question.

QUESTION:: Did the State in the criminal trial show youor lead evidence as to the stabbing of the deceased by means ofa postmortem report?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Just to remind you, Mr Chairman and Membersof the Committee there is the postmortem attached to his applicationthat is page 20 of the indexing. I'm on page 20 of the indexing. It will be page 19 of the postmortem but 20 of the index. Mr Chairman, Members of the Committee I'm on page 2 which becomespage 20 of the indexing. That is so Mr Chairman. On this pagereferred to it is indicated that this man received four stab wounds,do you remember this being said to you?

ANSWER:: No I don't remember that, I remember that hewas stabbed three times.

QUESTION:: The report was shown to you as you have indicated.

ANSWER:: Yes it was a long time, maybe it is like that.

QUESTION:: Have you told this Committee everything youdid pertaining to the killing of the deceased, how you started,what followed thereafter up to the end, did you tell us everything?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Did you not ask for cigarettes and money fromthe deceased first?

ANSWER:: No.

QUESTION:: Did you not chase the deceased?

ANSWER:: Yes I chased him but I ultimately returned.

QUESTION:: Have you seen your evidence?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Mr Sukudu your evidence was to the effect thatyou stabbed him thrice, he ran away and you went to your base.

CHAIRMAN(?):: No didn't he say I was not able to catchhim?

QUESTION:: He may have said that, I am indebted Mr Chairman. What did you use to stab the deceased?

ANSWER:: I used a knife it looked something like a "skaapskêr",what we call a sheep shears. It looks like a sheep shear.

QUESTION:: Was it a complete sheep shear, pair of sheepshears?

ANSWER:: No it was made out like a knife.

QUESTION:: In that it was one of the blades to the sheepshears?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Where did you get that from?

ANSWER:: I brought it with me from Geluk.....

QUESTION:: Mr Sukudu if you do not remember, I'm now goingthrough your application form, Mr Chairman and Members of theCommittee the index No will be 5 as well as application form pagewill be page 5. Question 11(a) reads as follows; "Werethe acts or omissions or offences committed in the execution ofan order of or on behalf of or with the approval of the organisation,institution, (indistinct) liberation movement, state departmentor security force concerned?". Your answer was, you said"On behalf of my own according approval understanding ofmy mind and part of execution political objectives can be sought." The important part now follows, then you said "I was notcommanded but as far as my own mentality is concerned I decidedto execute."

ANSWER:: Yes. To explain this that I wasn't, may youplease repeat your question?

QUESTION:: When you say you were not commanded.

ANSWER:: By that I mean because of my political knowledgeat that time and my standard, no one had commanded me to do that. I did this because of my political experience at that time,no one had commanded me to do that.

QUESTION:: Can you repeat that again and speak loud please?

ANSWER:: Yes, when I did this my political education bythat time caused me to do that and my experience, no one had givenme a command to do that.

QUESTION:: Would I be correct if I state that you didthis out of your own initiative?

ANSWER:: I don't understand your question.

QUESTION:: If I state that you did this out of your owninitiative.

ANSWER:: According to my evidence there it is like thatbecause of what the circumstances were at that time.

QUESTION:: Let us revert to page 4 Mr Chairman and Membersof the Committee of the application as well. The last paragraphon that page under paragraph 10(b), I'm going to read it out foryou, if you don't remember please indicate to me. You say

"So on my own decided to kill in order to indicate or convincethe illegitimate government to abolish apartheid system."

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: How was the killing of this man going to convincethe apartheid system?

ANSWER:: At that time because of my standards in politicsand my experience and according to the understanding of my mind.

QUESTION:: (Indistinct) of what?

ANSWER:: Yes by killing one of their elements.

QUESTION:: What did you expect to achieve by killing thisman?

ANSWER:: Presently objective which was sought.

QUESTION:: Did you actually benefit by killing Mr Grobbelaar?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: What did you achieve?

ANSWER:: Do you mean presently, may you please repeatthe question?

QUESTION:: What did you achieve by killing Mr Grobbelaar?

ANSWER:: Presently the masses of the people achieved thepolitical objective which was sought, to reconcile according tomy own political philosophical thought one ought to change. Thank you.

QUESTION:: According to your political understanding oneought to change? I didn't hear the last part, one ought to change?

ANSWER:: Yes I said one ought to change in political standings.

QUESTIONS:: You filed a supplementary affidavit whichI believe was prepared with the assistance of your current counsel,is that so?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: I'm going to refer Mr Chairman and Membersof the Committee to the supplementary affidavit page 24 thereof,the second-last paragraph. I'll quote this for you, you state

"I did not intend to rob deceased when killed him and myactions were motivated by a desire to, as a soldier, destroy theenemy whenever I get a chance."

Do you remember saying that?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Had you taken any measure before stabbing Grobbelaarto establish as to whether he was your enemy?

ANSWER:: When I met him as a white person, because I wasrunning away from white persons, I perceived him as my enemy.

QUESTION:: You have a right to state again that your decisionwas simply based on colour.

ANSWER:: He was one of the elements of those who weremy enemies.

QUESTION:: Your decision was based on colour.

ANSWER:: Yes.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS

QUESTIONS BY MEMBER OF COMMITTEE

QUESTIONS:: You were being pursued by the police as asuspect on a murder charge were you?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Were the other two people that were with youthat day also suspects?

ANSWER:: No only one of those two.

QUESTION:: Who was that?

ANSWER:: It was Sidney.

QUESTION:: Did either of them give evidence at your trial?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Which one?

ANSWER:: It is the same Sidney.

QUESTION:: He wasn't charged, was he a State witness ordid he give evidence in his defence?

ANSWER:: Yes he was a State witness.

QUESTION:: Did he, in the course of his evidence, saythat you asked the deceased for cigarettes and money?

ANSWER:: No I can't remember well. May you please repeatyour question?

QUESTION:: Did he say that you asked the deceased forcigarettes and money and that when he didn't give you any, youslapped him?

ANSWER:: Yes in his evidence he stated that.

QUESTION:: Did he also say that they tried to stop you,that they didn't take part in the attack on the deceased?

ANSWER:: Yes he said that.

QUESTION:: Thank you.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MEMBER OF COMMISSION

QUESTIONS BY MEMBER OF COMMISSION

QUESTION:: How many whites during your lifetime have youcome across. How many white people have you come across in yourlocation in Maokeng prior to 1992, 30 October?

ANSWER:: In the township, the existing political situationdidn't allow people, white people to be in the township, thatwas the first time I saw a white person.

QUESTION:: In your evidence you testified that you werebeing sought by white policemen?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Where were you being sought by the white policemen,was it not in the location?

ANSWER:: They used to drive in the township, the whitepolicemen.

QUESTION:: (Indistinct).

ANSWER:: I can't remember it's now a long time ago.

QUESTION:: What made you think that he could be, whatmade you to suspect him to be one of the policemen that mighthave been looking for you at that time?

ANSWER:: I must mention, two of them used to walk in thetownship, Oosthuizen and Killie, white policemen, that is whenthey were searching for me.

QUESTION:: Where, seen around the location?

ANSWER:: Yes when they were looking for people who werethe members of the African Congress Youth League they would beseen.

QUESTION:: In uniform carrying guns?

ANSWER:: No they are wearing...

QUESTION:: They are what?

QUESTION:: Meaning they were wearing private clothes andthey were not clothed in police uniform, is that what you aresaying?

ANSWER:: Yes they wanted to catch us, they didn't wantus to see them but we knew that they used to walk on their feetwhen they want to catch us.

QUESTION:: But you've told us they were the only whitesin the township, how could you not see them if the white men walkedthere.

ANSWER:: I said the white people, the police, I thinkI've mentioned the two of the white policemen, I also regardedhim as one of them because I didn't know him then.

QUESTION:: The question was the white policemen who cameinto the township did they come in wearing their police uniforms,you could see they were policemen?

ANSWER:: No, no they couldn't wear uniform.

QUESTION:: Were they not wearing uniforms?

ANSWER:: They wore private clothes.

QUESTION:: ...they were policemen is that what you aresaying?

ANSWER:: We couldn't trust those white people then, wethought they were police.

QUESTION:: So you are now saying you had seen white peoplein the township before?

ANSWER:: I don't understand your questions sir?

QUESTION:: When you were asked in evidence, you saidthis was the first time, the day you stabbed this man, was thefirst time you saw a white person in the location. Do you remembertelling us that?

ANSWER:: I said it was the, it was my first time to meethim and when I saw him I saw my enemy because they police werelooking for me because I regarded him as one of the white policemen.

QUESTION:: No, you were asked specifically by the ladyon my right, and you said it was the first time you saw a whiteperson in the location. Do you want to correct that now?

ANSWER:: Yes I want to rectify that, that is the timewhen we were running away from the police and they were, the whitepolicemen that I have indicated the two of them, they used tocome in the township to look for us.

QUESTION:: ...pedestrians or they would come looking foryou using cars or they would come on foot?

ANSWER:: They used to come with their cars and at timesthey would walk on foot and you know just in disguise.

QUESTION:: Mr Tsukubu did you attend meetings of the ANCYouth League during your membership with the ANC Youth League?

ANSWER:: Yes I attended meetings.

QUESTION:: Mr Tulo was he your commander?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Were you advised of the policies of the ANCwith regard to the attitude of the organisation? Were you familiarwith the policies of your organisation with regard to its relationswith the white people?

ANSWER:: Yes I knew it.

QUESTION:: Are you sure of that Mr Tsukubu?

ANSWER:: At that time I knew the policy and I also addedto my personal experience as a youth.

CHAIRMAN:: Is there any re-examination? I think youshould confine your re-examination strictly from what has beenasked.

RE-EXAMINATION

COUNSEL:: It will just be one aspect Mr Chairman and itstems out of the last question which was put by Ms Ganpepe(?). Were you familiar with the policies of the ANC regarding... You were asked that question, were you familiar with the policiesof the ANC regarding white persons, and you said yes. Stemmingfrom that question I want to find out from you whether duringthe course of the meetings that you attended of the ANC you learnedthat in the past members of the military wing, MK, had plantedbombs which exploded and injured white people?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Did you when you committed the act have any,did you relate these bombings of innocent white people?

MEMBER OF COMMISSION:: He's told us what his intentionwas, you are now putting words into his mouth.

COUNSEL:: Your Worship I think I will leave this lineof questioning. I thank you.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS

WITNESS IS EXCUSED

MR ?:: Mr Chairman this puts me in a position where I'mgoing to have to ask for a short adjournment. The reason hereforis that we were trying to locate a witness, I just want to findout whether we have been able to get this particular witness. He is a purported member of the Three Million Gang.

CHAIRMAN:: Yes.

MR ?:: I am therefore asking for a short adjournment andthe order in which I'm going to call my, I hope to be callingtwo or three witnesses just to get that order correct.

CHAIRMAN:: Yes very well, shall we adjourn for how long,15 minutes?

MR ?:: I think 15 minutes should do Mr Chairman, 15 minutes.

COMMISSION ADJOURNS - ON RESUMPTION

MR ?:: ...will testify mainly on behalf of all the applicantsjust to give us a general knowledge of the workings of the ThreeMillion Gang which have been referred to several times in theevidence led by the applicants.

CHAIRMAN:: Before you do that, we have heard a great dealof evidence about the Three Million Gang and I don't think ithas been questioned that there was such a gang or not. Isn'tit common cause that there was such a gang that operated in thisarea, and if it is common cause one must try and avoid leadingevidence which is going to be a repetition of a great deal ofwhat we have already got so I think you should consider that.

MR ?:: Mr Chairman yes I have considered it seriously,that is why the evidence that the witness is going to lead willmaybe just concentrate on the connections that the gang had witha specific political party.

CHAIRMAN:: If you will confine it to what is relevantyou may call him. What are his full names?

MR ?:: May I just add also with what could possibly bethe constant allegations regarding the collusion with certainmembers of the then South African Police.

CHAIRMAN:: Yes, what are his names?

MR ?:: His name is Mpho Samuel Taka.

CHAIRMAN:: Very well, is Mr Taka?

MPHO SAMUEL TAKA (ss)

EXAMINATION BY COUNSEL

Mr Chairman if you allow me I just want to lead the witness into,so that the Committee can have an idea of who he is. Mpho I'mgoing to ask you the questions in Sesotho, if there is anythingthat you do not understand you must stop me and tell me that youdo not understand. I want you to understand why are you sittinghere. Do you know why are you here?

ANSWER:: Yes I know why am I here.

QUESTION:: Don't think that you are being tried here. An application was made by a young man who was found guiltyof murdering certain people in that time of violence, that isthe time of Three Million. There was a conflict between themembers of the gang and the ANC Youth League. Now these peoplehave to prove through their evidence that all the acts they havedone were politically motivated, do you understand that?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: In other words I'm referring to the applicants. Now in their evidence they spoke a lot about the activities ofthese gangster called Three Million. Now I want you to clarifybriefly as to what were the activities, in other words just tellus anything in relation with this gang. Do you understand that?

CHAIRMAN:: More about you, who you are, where are youfrom, how old are you and his personal details please Mr Motsepe.

MR MOTSEPE:: Thank you sir.

QUESTION:: In the years of 1990 were you involved in theThree Million?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: After being involved in the Three Million Gangdo you know that they were in conflict with people in the community?

ANSWER:: Yes I know they were in conflict.

QUESTION:: Which part of the community were they targeting?

ANSWER:: There were many gangs in Maokeng like the Canadians,Sekelekwas(?), Witdoek, those are the gangs I remember.

QUESTION:: When Three Million was in conflict with whichorganisation was it in conflict? Let me ask you this do youknow the ANC Youth League?

ANSWER:: Yes I know.

QUESTION:: Were they in conflict with the ANC Youth League?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: I don't want you to tell us deeply into theiractivities but I want you to tell us in short do you think thesepeople had any relation with the political organisation?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Which organisation?

ANSWER:: Are you asking me a relationship between theThree Million and the other political organisations, it was Inkatha.

QUESTION:: Why do you say that?

ANSWER:: We were given the membership cards from Inkatha.

QUESTION:: In which year?

ANSWER:: I can't remember the year.

QUESTION:: Where did you get these membership cards?

ANSWER:: In town.

QUESTION:: From whom?

ANSWER:: From members of Inkatha in Welkom.

QUESTION:: Who was the then leader of Inkatha, do youknow Mr Msebi was the leader?

ANSWER:: Yes I know him.

QUESTION:: Where do you know him from?

ANSWER:: Here in Maokeng he used to visit Maokeng.

QUESTION:: Did he have any relation with you?

ANSWER:: Yes I have already indicated that we joined Inkatha.

QUESTION:: Now there was evidence here that (tape blank)...theseThree Million people. Let me first say before I ask you thisquestion, now did you perceive yourself as a leader or were youjust an ordinary member?

ANSWER:: I was just an ordinary member, I must say I wasa leader when coming to singing.

QUESTION:: What ngomas?

ANSWER:: Ngomas are songs that we used to sing.

QUESTION:: Do you regard yourself as a leader?

ANSWER:: Yes when coming to music.

QUESTION:: But now I want to know when decisions weremade were you involved?

ANSWER:: Because I was still young I was not involvedand I couldn't get a glimpse of what they were saying.

QUESTION:: Now there was evidence here that the policein some ways were related or they were on the side of the ThreeMillion when coming to conflict resolution there was such in evidence. I now want to remind you about an incident that you might beable to recall where Sgt Oosthuizen said something to you, doyou remember that incident?

ANSWER:: Yes I remember.

QUESTION:: When you met Sgt Oosthuizen where were you,where were you heading to?

ANSWER:: We were members of Three Million, one of us hadbeen killed in the old location, he was Boetie Krag, we were goingto that area to revenge. On our way we met this Oosthuizen inthe company of Piet Mahlonananie(?). He stopped the kombi inwhich we were and he let us out and he let us lie on the flooron the ground, and he took our knives all of them and then hesaid to us where are you going to. We told him that we weregoing to the old location because one of us had been killed. Oosthuizen said to us we must stop killing the children, we mustface people like Dennis Bloem(?)...[interjections from audience]...

QUESTION:: Sorry interpreter please repeat that we didn'thear a thing.

ANSWER:: We were then told not to concentrate on killingthe youth we have to kill people like Dennis Bloem.

QUESTION:: Let me then pass that one, were you also convictedfor other matters like crime?

ANSWER:: Yes that's true.

QUESTION:: There was an incident where a prosecutor calledMrs Pienaar was told, do you remember the name?

ANSWER:: Yes I remember the name but I don't understandactually what you want to say.

QUESTION:: There was a woman, a female prosecutor whowas working in this area do you remember that prosecutor?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: What can you tell us about what you know asto what kind of a relationship did she have with the Three Million?

ANSWER:: There was no relation between us and herselfbut everytime she would remand our cases just like anybody else'scase.

QUESTION:: Did you go to her house to paint?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: With whom were you there?

ANSWER:: I can't remember well.

QUESTION:: But the people you were with were they membersof Three Million?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: She was brought chickens that were about tobe sold in the township?

ANSWER:: She used to sell chicken in the township.

QUESTION:: When she came to sell the chicken where didshe take it to so that it can be sold?

ANSWER:: She used to stop at Dwiti's(?) place just infront of the yard and people would come there to buy the chicken.

QUESTION:: Are you sure it was her?

ANSWER:: Yes I am sure.

QUESTION:: Mr Taka did you attend any of the Three MillionGang meetings?

ANSWER:: Are you referring to meetings, yes I used tobe present.

QUESTION:: Did you ever see Mr Msibi(?) at any of yourmeetings?

ANSWER:: Yes I once saw him. (Tape switched off andon, disrupted questioning). Meetings were held like this, onWednesdays there was a Sierra sedan from Welkom, white in colourdriven by the same person.

QUESTION:: In the meetings did he take any active role?

ANSWER:: They were only bringing us bread that is theimportant part he took in our meetings.

QUESTION:: ...where the IFP membership cards given toyou?

ANSWER:: I can't remember everything happened a long timeago.

QUESTION:: Did you have your IFP membership card yourself?

ANSWER:: Yes I had one.

QUESTION:: Did the Three Million Gang have a choir?

ANSWER:: Yes during funerals we would have a choir.

QUESTION:: What sort of songs were you singing?

ANSWER:: We were singing Gospel songs and hymns like anyother choir.

QUESTION:: Thank you Mr Chairman no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS

QUESTIONS BY MEMBER OF COMMISSION

QUESTION:: You said to Mr Mtsepe that the Three MillionGang conflicted with the ANC Youth League, you remember that?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Do you know why?

ANSWER:: No I don't.

QUESTION:: Who did you hear from that there was this conflict?

ANSWER:: I used to see the fighting just going on.

QUESTION:: Were you yourself involved in any such conflicts?

ANSWER:: I was an informer but if we were, I would goto the fight I would feel scared and frightened.

QUESTION:: What did your role entail as an informer?

ANSWER:: It was just to have a look at the attacks thatwere launched. I used to stand at the corners to monitor theattack that would take place and I would go to them and tell them.

QUESTION:: Maybe you should give us some more details,concrete information about that. Would you, I don't want toput words into your mouth I would like you yourself to tell ushow you would do that?

ANSWER:: As I've already indicated I would stand at thecorner and then I would mark the corners where the enemies wouldappear from.

QUESTION:: ...that you are referring to?

ANSWER:: I've already indicated that we were fightingwith the Canadians, with the Witdoek and the third one I can'tremember and the ANC Organisation.

QUESTION:: I'm restricting myself to the conflict betweenthe ANC Youth League and the Three Million Gang. When you sayyou would inform are you saying that you would inform the ThreeMillion Gang about an imminent attack by the ANC Youth Leagueor would you inform the ANC Youth League about an imminent attackby the Three Million Gang?

ANSWER:: I was telling the Three Millions that look youare going be attacked.

QUESTION:: How would you know that yourself?

ANSWER:: I explained that I used to stand at the cornerand I would see when people come to attack.

QUESTION:: ...get that information possibly from membersof the ANC Youth League themselves and then go and leak it tothe Three Million Gang?

ANSWER:: No I used to stay just there to watch for a possibleattack.

QUESTION:: Were you at some stage a member of the ANCYouth League?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: How did it come about that you joined the ThreeMillion Gang?

ANSWER:: The Three Million people arrived and they stayedin the township that I stay in. I was still a student and thenI was chased at school, I was being told that I was a Three Millionmember. Many people have been killed because they were regardedas Three Million because I was also scared to be killed, I decidedto stay at (indistinct).

QUESTION:: ...wanted to become a member of Three MillionGang?

ANSWER:: Who are you referring to sir, who recruited me?

QUESTION:: I don't know I wish I knew that's why I'm askingyou because I want to know how you became a member of the ThreeMillion Gang. How you left the ANC Youth League to become amember of the Three Million Gang.

ANSWER:: I left it because I was told that I was a ThreeMillion member and I couldn't go to school anymore and I decidedto go and stay at (indistinct) not to attend school anymore.

QUESTION:: Who told you that you were a member of theThree Million Gang?

ANSWER:: Many friends of mine at school.

QUESTION:: Not members of the gang themselves?

ANSWER:: Which gang are you referring to, the Three MillionGang, yes some of them were telling me that I was a psycho(?)

QUESTION:: Were you a member of the Three Million Gangat the time that they said so?

ANSWER:: No.

QUESTION:: As a result of what they said you then eventuallydecided to become a member because of what they said?

ANSWER:: Yes sir because I already bled.

QUESTION:: Who injured you?

ANSWER:: Some of my friends at school.

QUESTION:: Yes, let's go back to the incident with Oosthuizen. You say he said to you you mustn't kill small children but youmust kill people like Senator Bloem?

ANSWER:: That's correct.

QUESTION:: What sort of people would understand them tobe when he says kill people like Senator Bloem it doesn't makea lot of sense to me. What sort of people were they, what sortof people did you understand the Sergeant to be referring to?

ANSWER:: The leaders within the ANC Organisation, that'swhat I think.

QUESTION:: Is that how you understood Sgt Oosthuizen?

ANSWER:: That's correct.

QUESTION:: Was Mr Bloem at that time in fact a leaderof the ANC?

ANSWER:: That's correct.

QUESTION:: What was the response of your gang membersto that suggestion, did the gang members find that suggestionacceptable?

ANSWER:: Yes we accepted the suggestion because we werescared that we would be arrested, we wanted him to leave us alone.

QUESTION:: Did you in fact do that as he had suggested?

ANSWER:: No we never did that.

QUESTION:: In other words you did not kill leaders ofthe ANC as according to Sgt Oosthuizen suggested?

ANSWER:: That's correct.

QUESTION:: But did members of the Three Million Gang thenkill members of the ANC who were not leaders?

ANSWER:: I don't know.

QUESTION:: Is it possible that it could have happenedand you don't know?

ANSWER:: Yes I just saw on TV and reading the newspapersthat such things took place.

QUESTION:: If you were to hear that some.......

ANSWER:: ...I was released in October with bails and Iwas arrested on 26 February so it was those months and it's fourmonths, I can still remember, but when coming to a person thereare so many and they would pass by everytime and I can't rememberevery face.

QUESTION:: Were you given the gun as soon as you werereleased on bail?

ANSWER:: Ja it just happened like that, I never organisedit.

QUESTION:: Why did you take a gun when you were out onbail?

ANSWER:: For the sake of my community's lives and....(tapeswitched off)...

QUESTION:: Apart from killing them, are there any otherthings which members of the Three Million Gang did to membersof the ANC, apart from killing them as Oosthuizen has suggested?

ANSWER:: I can't remember some of the many things thathappened.

QUESTION:: Yesterday also evidence was given that membersof the Three Million Gangs would disrupt matches organised bymembers of the ANC and also attempt to break consumer boycottsorganised by members of the ANC. Did that in fact happen?

ANSWER:: What I know every time when we were in town andwhen we come back it would be a consumer boycott but when, whenthe people opened the kombis and they see that we are in the kombisthey would run away, so that is one of the things that made usstop the consumer boycotts.

QUESTION:: Is that how you stopped this consumer boycott?

ANSWER:: I think that was the thing disturbing them actually.

QUESTION:: Why would people run away on seeing you?

ANSWER:: They used to run away because it was rumouredthat Three Million people were killing people and many thingswere said and that is why they decided, they ran away.

QUESTION:: Did members of the Three Million Gang assaultother people as well, other than members of the ANC?

ANSWER:: No it's not like that.

QUESTION:: Is the Three Million Gang still in operationnow?

ANSWER:: No.

QUESTION:: What stopped it or what killed it?

ANSWER:: A special unit arrived here and we were all takento prison and when we came out things were back to normal, therewas quiet in Maokeng.

QUESTION:: Do you know who was in charge of that specialunit?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Who was that?

ANSWER:: Are you referring to the leader of that specialunit, police unit, it's Captain Dareen(?).

QUESTION:: Did they tell you what they were arrestingyou for?

ANSWER:: No they didn't tell us anything, they arrivedin the morning it was on 15 June, I can't remember the year, andthey said to us then I saw many cases that people have been doingto us, they said we should come with them so that we can, theycan rectify those cases.

QUESTION:: ...they locked you up?

ANSWER:: No they didn't lock us up first, they left usat offices at (indistinct) Maokeng and the photographed us whilewe were there and they then took us to the court of law and thecourt was reminded (sic) and we were just surprised on which basiswere we reminded.

QUESTION:: Before the arrival of the special unit hadthere been any members of the Three Million Gangs who were arrestedin connection with offences committed in the township?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: As far as you know had those people been convictedand sentenced to jail or what happened to them, as far as youknow?

ANSWER:: Some of them went to jail and some of them weredischarged, they were found not guilty.

QUESTION:: You have told us that you would some time occasionallybe fed bread by somebody or some people, apart from being suppliedwith bread did the Three Million Gang, as far as you know, receiveany financial assistance from anybody?

ANSWER:: I don't know I think I've already explained thatmy role in the Three Million I was still a youth I don't knowanything that has got to do with financial matters.

QUESTION:: I'm not quite sure if I understand your evidence,perhaps you could help me. There was the Three Million Gangand then there were three other gangs you mentioned one of whichwas the Witdoeke, but I didn't get the names of the other two. You said you didn't know the name of the third but you, theCanadians is that so?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Did these gangs fight one another?

ANSWER:: Those were the gangs fighting Three Million.

QUESTION:: Those three gangs were fighting, and was theANC Youth League like a gang too?

ANSWER:: No it wasn't a gang, I just put it aside I nowremember the third one. I've already said it was Canadians,Witdoek and Tsekeletswas.

CHAIRMAN:: Can that name be spelled please?

ANSWER:: T-s-e-k-e-l-e-t-s-w-a-s.

QUESTION:: ....any of you self-defence units?

ANSWER:: Who are you referring to sir?

QUESTION:: These three gangs, we've heard of the self-defenceunits, do you know who I'm talking about?

ANSWER:: Yes I understand you.

QUESTION:: Because my recollection is that one of thewitnesses we've heard told us that the Witdoeke were the self-defenceunits or certainly had ANC connections, do you know anything aboutthat?

ANSWER:: No I don't know anything about that, they wereon their own I don't know that is why we couldn't meet, that meansI wouldn't be in a position to know whether they were SDU's.

QUESTION:: I'll leave that for the moment but there wasgang fighting taking place all over was there? Were these gangsfighting one another?

ANSWER:: Yes they were fighting one another.

QUESTION:: Did Sgt Oosthuizen stop you when you were onyour way to another fight?

ANSWER:: Yes he stopped us, he wanted us to go back.

QUESTION:: And he disarmed you?

ANSWER:: Yes he disarmed us.

QUESTION:: Did you go back?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Mr Taka who gave instructions to your gangto make attacks against the members of the ANC?

ANSWER:: Nobody came up with orders, we were giving ordersourselves.

QUESTION:: Was there no one who was planning the attackson the ANC amongst the gang members?

ANSWER:: Nobody.

QUESTION:: What did Diwiti(?) do as he was the leaderof the gang was he not responsible for the planning?

ANSWER:: No I only knew that Diwiti was the leader ofthe gang when I read that in the papers...[interjections fromaudience].

QUESTION:: To your knowledge who was the leader of theThree Million Gang?

MEMBER OF COMMISSION:: Sorry could we, answer please wecouldn't hear the previous answer.

QUESTION:: Will you please repeat your answer?

ANSWER:: I said as it has been alleged that Diwiti wasour leader I don't know that, I was only surprised to read thatin the newspapers.

QUESTION:: Was Diwiti a member of the Three Million Gang,was he ever a member?

ANSWER:: Yes that's correct.

QUESTION:: To your knowledge who was the leader of theThree Million Gang?

ANSWER:: According to my knowledge there were no leaders,we were all leaders.

QUESTION:: How many members constituted the Three MillionGang Mr Taka?

ANSWER:: We were about 40-50 in number.

QUESTION:: How were these members recruited, were theyrecruited from the community of Maokeng or do they come from outsideMaokeng township?

ANSWER:: They were the citizens of Maokeng but how theyall met I don't know, I only found them already in a group.

QUESTION:: What acts to your knowledge were committedby the Three Million Gang against specifically the ANC members?

ANSWER:: I have already indicated that I didn't take partin fighting, I would stand back.

QUESTION:: You also testified Mr Taka that you know ofacts committed against the ANC members by the Three Million Gangof whom you were a member.

ANSWER:: Yes I was a member but when coming to fight Iwasn't involved.

QUESTION:: Are you unable to tell us of any acts whichthe Three Million Gang committed against the community of Maokengor even the ANC members in particular.

ANSWER:: I've already said that I was arrested for somethingI didn't know.

QUESTION:: Mr Taka you said that there was a choir whichcould sing some hymns at the funerals?

ANSWER:: Yes I said that.

QUESTION:: Would it have been the funerals of some membersof the Three Million Gang?

ANSWER:: Yes that's true.

QUESTION:: Yesterday one witness told us that during someof the funerals of members of the Three Million Gang, an IFP flagwould be raised. Is that what happened in fact?

ANSWER:: Yes that's what happened.

QUESTION:: Did it happen at all the funerals of the ThreeMillion Gangs that you attended?

ANSWER:: Yes I think so because, but not at all funerals.

QUESTION:: Who hoisted this flag, do you know?

ANSWER:: These flags were handled by small children.

QUESTION:: Thank you Mr Chairman. I would just liketo ask you the next question regarding the evidence which yougave when we talked about what Oosthuizen told you, that is SgtOosthuizen. You said Mr Oosthuizen said you should kill peoplelike Dennis Bloem because you knew Dennis Bloem as a leader. My question is regarding this matter, do you know of any incidentwhere Mr Dennis Bloem's house was attacked by the Three MillionGang members?

ANSWER:: No I don't know about that incident.

QUESTION:: Thank you very much.

INTERPRETER:: The interpreters would like to rectify thethird name about the gang, instead of Tsekelewas it has to be[interjections from crowd]...the interpreters would like to rectifythe spelling mistake with Tsekeletswas, we remove the t-s at theend, it becomes "K" which means T-s-e-k-e-l-e-k-w-a-s.

WITNESS IS EXCUSED

MR MOTSEPE:: ....I'm representing will be Senator DennisBloem.

CHAIRMAN:: Will you be giving your evidence in Englishor Afrikaans Mr Bloem?

MR BLOEM:: I prefer Afrikaans.

DENNIS BLOEM (ss)

QUESTION:: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Bloem we've hearda lot of evidence in this case about many things which happenedover a very long period of time. I am going to ask you to beas brief as possible when you answer my questions and not to givetoo much detail if I don't specifically ask for it. My questions,I would just like to give you a general outline of the questionsI'm going to ask, they're going to be dealing with the politicalclimate which reigned here, the membership of the applicants,your position in the ANC at that time and what the ANC's attitudewas in respect of the establishment of so-called "self-defenceunits" and any attempts made in respect of reconciliation. Lastly, any acts committed against you in relation to the violenceof those days. Firstly, please tell us briefly what, accordingto you, was the political climate at the time in this area in1990.

ANSWER:: After the unbanning of the political parties,a group was formed and was called the Three Million. The situation,as from September 1990 until 1992, was sheer hell in Maokeng,I can describe it as hell. Nobody felt safe even just to walkto his toilet at night. I was a community leader and along withother leaders such as Reverend Gozongo, Mr Lefafa and many othersdid everything we could, everything in our power to bring thissituation to the attention of the government of the day but tono avail.

QUESTION:: I would just like to interrupt you here, ifyou could perhaps tell us what your views were regarding the politicalareas in the area.

ANSWER:: Yes, the political activities were as follows- the ANC in Kroonstad were the majority party. There was Azapoand the PAC yes those are the two political parties which I canremember but the ANC...

QUESTION:: What about Inkatha?

ANSWER:: Yes Inkatha that also came to my attention afterthe Three Million Gang members were arrested by Captain De Reerit then came to my attention that they were members of the IFP.

QUESTION:: Would you say that there was freedom of politicalaction and conduct that anybody was free to take part in whateverpolitical activities he or she wanted to or was free to belongto any political grouping?

ANSWER:: According to me Chairperson it was anybody'sright to join whatever political party they wanted to.

QUESTION:: My question to you is were people free to joinwhatever political party they wanted to, for instance could anybodyjoin the ANC or would there have been any obstacles preventinga person from doing so?

ANSWER:: You see in 1990 when this violence and crimewas the order of the day here in Kroonstad, people were very afraidto be seen wearing any apparel that could be associated with theANC, they didn't want to be associated with the ANC in any way.

QUESTION:: Why do you say that?

ANSWER:: Because this gang prevented people from for instance,I'm just going to mention a surname, for instance there will seeVan der Merwe with Dennis, then you'd be a target because thenyou'd be seen as an ANC member.

QUESTION:: What did they do which, in your opinion, preventedthe free political movement and activity of people?

ANSWER:: I'm going to give some examples just to demonstratewhat I'm talking about. In 1990 marches were arranged by theresidents of Maokeng to protest against rental monies and alsoto give expression to other grievances and this Three Milliongang disrupted these marches several times, there were consumerboycotts organised by the residents of Maokeng and once againthe Three Million gang was used to break up this boycott. Theywere stationed at the taxi ranks in order to guard people andtell people don't be afraid buy in the town you'll not be harmed,we are here to protect you.

QUESTION:: What did they normally do when they were busybreaking up a march or a demonstration?

ANSWER:: They arrived in Kombis, we normally started ourmarches at Constantia shopping centre and they would arrive thereand it's obvious the previous witness has already told the Commissionthat if people just caught sight of these people they just ranaway, and that is how the marches and boycotts were broken up.

QUESTION:: Are you aware of any other ways, apart fromwhat you've just mentioned, any other methods used by them tohinder the free political movement and activities of people, especiallyANC supporters in this area, anything apart from what you've mentioned?

ANSWER:: As I've already said Chairperson, if they knewthat this person was well disposed towards or was a sympathiserof the ANC, he was immediately a target and they would then ensurethat they would attack that person.

QUESTION:: Were these attacks only directed at ANC supportersor were the attacks directed at the community at large?

ANSWER:: I think I can say that whether you were ANC,whether you were a supporter or not, people died. The actualtarget of the Three Million gang was the ANC but the didn't actuallydiscriminate against their victims.

QUESTION:: Right, I would like to move away from the politicalclimate. Membership of the applicants in respect to the ANC,as far as that is concerned I'd like you to tell the Committeewhat your position was in the ANC at the time.

ANSWER:: At that time I was the Deputy Chairperson ofthe local branch here in Kroonstad, the Chairperson was ReverendGozongo. The applicants were members of the ANC Youth League.

QUESTION:: You were personally aware of the membershipof each of these persons?

ANSWER:: Yes I was so aware, I was aware of the membershipof the applicants.

QUESTION:: In particular I would like you to tell us asfar as applicant Thulu, as far as his membership is concerned,was he an ordinary member or was he a leader?

ANSWER:: Petrus Thulu Matshabe was not an ordinary member,he was a leader, a very respected leader in the Youth League andin the ANC circles and in the community as well.

QUESTION:: He told us about the so-called self-defenceunits which were created, was the ANC aware of the establishmentof these units?

ANSWER:: I would like to explain it as follows. Thedefence units were established by the community and the reasonwhy they were established was because of all the various attemptswhich had been made to protect the community from various attacks. These attempts however, did not help, they were to no availand for that reason the youth and the residents decided to defendthemselves from these attacks.

QUESTION:: Do you confirm that Mr Thulu was involved inthe establishment of these units?

ANSWER:: Yes, yes Chairperson, Mr Thulu was the personwho got the self-defence units off the ground.d

QUESTION:: Do you know of any meeting at which a decisionwas taken that the persons who were involved in the units hadto attack members of the Three Million gang and to kill them?

ANSWER:: Such a meeting was never held, it was never decidedthat the self-defence units had to attack members of the ThreeMillion or kill them. The purpose of the self-defence unitswas to protect the community from these attacks and not to becomeattackers themselves.

QUESTION:: Mr Bloem, evidence has been led here that,or let me put it this way, as far as the application of Petrusis concerned, I would like to for purposes of the record requestthat you tell us whether there is any relationship between yourselfand the applicant, family relationship?

ANSWER:: Yes Chairperson, Roland Petrus his father, PhillipPetrus, is my cousin. In other words Roland Petrus he's my cousinonce removed.

QUESTION:: The Bloem person who was killed allegedly atthe taxi rank at Kroonstad, he was allegedly killed by the ThreeMillion gang, what was your relationship with him, were you related?

ANSWER:: Yes the person who was killed at the taxi rank was my cousin, Simon Bloem.

QUESTION:: Mr Bloem, I'll come back to this aspect, thisaspect of Roland Petrus, but now I'd like you to tell us brieflyabout what you did as a leader to try and avoid conflict in thecommunity and to try and combat the crime and violence. I'llrefer you not to an example or an incident and then you must justelaborate on that. This is an incident referred to by applicantTulu which happened at the church of Reverend Gozongo. Do youknow about such an incident?

ANSWER:: Yes I am aware of that incident.

QUESTION:: Very briefly tell us what happened there, whatwas the purpose of your meeting at the church and what happened?

ANSWER:: Yes on that particular day I or rather Diwiticame to me and in respect of this conflict between himself anda member of the ANC Youth League I was involved in trying to makepeace between himself and Mr Daniel George. Diwiti came to meand said that he wanted this thing to be resolved, he wanted totell the ANC Youth League's members what had happened and to sortit out. I convened a meeting with Reverend Gozongo, with theThree Million and with the Youth League. At this meeting we'djust started with the meeting when some of the Youth League memberssaid that they were not going to speak, they did not want to talkto a murderer such as Diwiti. I tried, I pleaded with them,I told them that for the sake of peace in Kroonstad we simplyhad to talk and I noticed that the situation was becoming extremelytense and I said to Diwiti that we should rather move away fromthe church because I did not want to see any blood in a church. Reverend Gozongo also spoke to these people and I got into mycar, Diwiti also got into my car, his sister Florence got intomy car and one other person, Stoffel, Stoffel Mofokeng also gotinto my car. We drove out of the church yard, we drove to BrentPark. When we arrived in Brent Park in front of my house...

QUESTION:: Just before you continue, why did you driveto Brent Park, do you mean that you went to Brent Park with Diwitior what was the purpose of this?

ANSWER:: The purpose of why I drove away from the churchwith Diwiti in my car was that we could find a calmer situationand climate in which to talk to each other, I could see the situationwas extremely tense and I wanted there to be peace between thesetwo groups. That is why I drove away with them.

QUESTION:: Now did you drive with both groups to BrentPark or with only one group?

ANSWER:: I drove with one of the groups.

QUESTION:: In other words the Three Million group?

ANSWER:: I wouldn't say the group I drove off with twopersons, Dwiti and his sister, those were the people in my car.

QUESTION:: Then what happened at your house?

ANSWER:: We stood outside my house and we were talkingand then we noticed some kombis, two or three kombis driving inthe direction of my house. Whistles were being blown in thesekombis. I said to them let's rather leave this place otherwisethere will be a murder committed here in front of my house.

QUESTION:: Who is "they"?

ANSWER:: I told Florence and Diwiti.

QUESTION:: Did you then drive off with Diwiti?

ANSWER:: Yes, Diwiti first said no I'm not going to runaway any longer from these people, I pleaded with him I said Diwitiplease let us leave, let us drive away here because I don't wantanybody to be killed right here in front of my house and he thenagreed and we drove away.

QUESTION:: You then took him to a safe place?

ANSWER:: That's correct.

QUESTION:: Let me just leave that aspect there for themoment and let me focus your attention onto the next aspect whichdeals with alleged attacks on ANC leaders at the time by the ThreeMillion gang. You've already testified that you were a leader. Can you tell us about any attacks on you personally by membersof the Three Million gang?

ANSWER:: Chairperson, I will mention one such incident. QUESTION: If you say you are going to mention one incidentdo you then mean that there were more?

ANSWER:: Yes that is correct.

QUESTION:: I wouldn't like you to go into the detail ofall these incidents, please just tell us how many incidents therewere in which you were attacked?

ANSWER:: There were three attacks which I can recall inwhich they attempted to attack me.

QUESTION:: Were these attacks directed at you by membersof the Three Million gang?

ANSWER:: Yes, yes and I'm now going to talk about oneincident in particular, just briefly. I was inside the courtroomwith a friend of mine, Cecil Antoni and with my father, Mr Bloem. The members of the Three Million gang swore at me, they threatenedme, they threatened to kill me in the presence of about 10 policemenwho laughed when they heard these threats and insults. Thatwas the one incident, I won't go into it any deeper but I willnow mention an incident...

QUESTION:: As regards that incident, were you, was anythingdone physically speaking to actually carry out this threat?

ANSWER:: No, no the reason why nothing was done to mephysically was that I immediately left the scene, I walked awayfrom the courtroom.

QUESTION:: Was there an incident that took place at yourhouse, please tell us about that?

ANSWER:: Yes in December 1990 or maybe 91, yes I think1991, the Three Million gang went to Brent Park on a Saturday,I was not in the shop. They went into the shop ...

QUESTION:: Just tell us what shop are you referring to?

ANSWER:: That's a general dealer shop which belonged tome. They went into the shop armed with firearms, pangas, knives,they ran into the shop, they asked my wife Edith where I was. She said that I was not at the shop, and I wasn't. They thenstarted to grab some of the stuff on the shelves, cigarettes,money, they took whatever they could lay their hands on in theshop. They told my wife that she must tell me that they wouldkill me wherever they found me. That was on the Saturday orrather the Friday, no the Saturday. On that Sunday, the nextSunday it happened again. They once again came to my shop, onceagain looking for me, they did exactly the same, they took someof my stuff, money etc. I reported it to the police, these twoincidents, on that Monday it happened once again. On Mondayat about 4 o'clock I refrained from going to the shop becauseI knew my life was in danger and the shop is a public place whereanybody can enter. My wife ran out from the back door, she wentto call my father, she wanted help. My father had a licensedfirearm in his possession, I don't have a firearm. My fathercame and he also phoned the police. Now there is a satellitepolice station in Brent Park and this Sergeant, I can't rememberhis surname now, but this Sergeant came, my father detained themin the kombi, he found them in the shop and he detained them inthe kombi. My father said to them what do you want, you won'tleave here. I was at home at the time with some of the othermembers of the ANC and the Youth League. One of my friends ranor drove to my house and came and told me that the Three Milliongang members were at my shop and that they wanted to steal andtake things in the shop.

QUESTION:: Yes, I think that will suffice. Was therean incident in which members of the Youth League came to your,or were attacked at your house by the Three Million gang?

ANSWER:: Yes, yes we were sitting on the stoep and a kombiarrived at my house and some of the members noticed this very,very quickly and they started running away in various directions. Now I would like to make it very clear to the Committee at myhouse there was a very high wall with fences and gates. My gateswere always kept locked and nobody could just enter if I was insideand this kombi just drove past.

QUESTION:: So there was no attack?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Maybe just to round it off Mr Bloem, the kombiwhich drove past your home, what kind of a kombi was it, was ita taxi?

QUESTION:: No, no it was not a taxi there were gang membersinside this kombi.

QUESTION:: What were they doing?

ANSWER:: They were planning to attack our friends or comrades,and myself.

QUESTION:: Is that what you thought?

ANSWER:: Pardon me?

QUESTION:: Is that what you thought, that they were comingto attack you?

ANSWER:: Yes that's correct.

QUESTION:: The next aspect which I'd like to come to dealswith the alleged involvement of the police in general or the roleplayed by the police in solving these problems. What can youtell us about that? Please just wait a moment I will pose thequestion so we can be quite brief, so we don't have a long story. Were there any meetings held by yourself or the other ANC leadersto try and seek peace and a solution for the problems with thepolice in the period 1990-1992?

ANSWER:: I will talk about one incident relating to ameeting at which we talked to the District Commissioner, he'snow Brigadier Van Wyk. We held a meeting with him and we askedthat they must please do something about the problems posed bythis violent band and the answer given to us by this Brigadierwas that we were harassing the Three Million gang and that wehad to stop bothering them.

QUESTION:: Were there any meetings held by yourself and/orthe ANC leaders with the Three Million gang or George Ramasimong'sparents at which attempts were made to secure peace?

ANSWER:: Yes Chairperson, many meetings were held at which

I for instance with George, Diwiti and Rev Gozongo we often hadmeetings to try and solve this problem of violence.

QUESTION:: Were there any solutions to these problemsas a result of all these meetings?

ANSWER:: No, no absolutely nothing came of it. I mustmake this very clear, the reason as far as I'm concerned why therewere never any positive results as a result of the meetings, mayI mention that?

QUESTION:: Yes, yes tell us briefly?

ANSWER:: The reason was that this man was in the powerof the police, even if he tried very hard to escape that situationhe was used by the police force.

QUESTION:: Why do you say that Mr Bloem?

ANSWER:: The reason why I'm saying this the day when weall got together when this thing started happening when the YouthLeague did not want the meeting to continue, Ramasimong, Diwitigave Rev Gozongo and myself a piece of paper and he showed usand he said if Dennis and Maruti, Dennis and Maruti, this thingwill go far if we don't stop it. Captain Schilling gave me thisnumber and told me that if I need weapons I must just phone him25811, that was the telephone number of Capt Schilling.

QUESTION:: Alright, let us leave that there unless youhave something else that you'd like to mention? The involvementof the gang, or rather the relationship between the gang and theInkatha Freedom Party, what can you tell us about that?

ANSWER:: There were various allegations in this regard,I could well believe that, I could well believe that there wassuch a relationship. This white Sierra which had been mentioned,I saw this car personally on various occasions, saw it enteringKroonstad.

QUESTION:: Allegations were also made about Inkatha flagswhich were used at funerals, were you aware of that?

ANSWER:: Yes it is so. I always monitored the situationin Maokeng just to see what was happening and that is indeed so,banners were carried at the funerals.

QUESTION:: Do you know about Mr Msibi, the Inkatha leader?

ANSWER:: Yes that is correct I know Mr Msibi.

QUESTION:: Who was he, give us a bit more information?

ANSWER:: Mr Msibi was an official in the Inkatha FreedomParty in the Free State, he was a senior official.

QUESTION:: Were there any talks with him about the issueof peace and peace initiatives?

ANSWER:: Mr Chairman I remember a day upon which Mr Msibiand Mr Kumalo were here in Mr Lefafa's house, we met and we discussedthis situation of violence in Kroonstad.

QUESTION:: Just to round it off Mr Bloem, you will agreethat it was a very hard time for the community of Kroonstad?

ANSWER:: Yes it was a very bitter, very difficult timefor the residents of Kroonstad, Kroonstad white and black.

QUESTION:: You sit here as a leader today, a leader inthe community, what would your message be as regards all the manybad things which happened, what would be your message to the communitytoday?

ANSWER:: I was raised in a Christian home, I was verywell brought up and I don't believe that anybody can condone whathappened here in Maokeng, from both sides. I think that thepeace which we are enjoying in Maokeng now I will pray that itwill always continue. I would never again want to see children,men, women being buried week after week, I don't want to see thathappening again in Kroonstad.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS

COMMISSION ADJOURNS - ON RESUMPTION

DENNIS BLOEM (suo)

EXAMINATION BY MR MOTSEPE

QUESTION:: Mr Bloem we have heard about the involvementof the police with the Three Million gang, can you just elaborateon that?

ANSWER:: Yes, the involvement of the police with the gang,as far as that's concerned I've already mentioned one incidentand I think the previous witness also related a particular incident. Must I elaborate? You see on various occasions what wouldhappen would be this, for instance one case where the PremierMilling Company, their employees were on their way to go and arrestthe Three Million gang and to take them to the charge office. The police intervened, the police were already in Trobo therewhere the Three Million gang members lived. The police werewaiting in their caspirs in an open piece of land, they were waitingfor the Premier Milling employees. I was present, I was sittingin a car with a certain Mr Touw(?) to see what the police woulddo. The police chased away these workers, they shot teargas,whilst the Three Million gang were present amongst the membersof the police in between the caspirs so these people were overcomeby the teargas. I clearly saw that the police did not take anyaction against the Three Million gang with weapons and these PremierMilling employees were unarmed.

QUESTION:: Did the police at any stage act against theANC with weapons?

ANSWER:: The police always acted against the communityand the ANC using their weapons.

QUESTION:: Can you mention one example?

ANSWER:: Yes, children were shot dead in Maokeng by thepolice.

QUESTION:: Were these policemen charged?

ANSWER:: They were charged yes, cases were made againstthese policemen but nothing happened, nothing came of these cases.

QUESTION:: Did you monitor these police matters, thesecases made against them?

ANSWER:: I think perhaps, yes I monitored them perhapsmore so than anybody else in Kroonstad, I monitored the progressof these cases but nothing happened.

QUESTION:: Is it possible for you to name the police involvedin these incidents?

ANSWER:: Yes, it was a Lt Mbombo, it was a Captain Umsimau(?),I'm not quite sure of his surname but he was the Captain thenand I always went to them to go and ask about the progress inthese cases.

QUESTION:: Was there a verdict?

ANSWER:: No there was never any trail in these matters.

QUESTION:: One of the applicants Roland Petrus, was hea member of the ANC Youth League?

ANSWER:: Yes he was a member of the ANC Youth League.

QUESTION:: We've heard evidence that Roland Petrus hetestified to that himself that he did not live in Maokeng buthe came from Johannesburg, what do you say?

ANSWER:: Yes, let me explain. Roland, as he also testified,Roland's father originally came from Kroonstad he was born here. Roland often came to Kroonstad he virtually lived here, hisheart was here, he went to school here.

QUESTION:: Were you aware of Roland's actions on this

particular day when he killed Diwiti?

ANSWER:: I was accused No 2, I was present in the carwith Roland and therefore I was aware of what happened.

QUESTION:: What car was this?

ANSWER:: It was a Honda Ballade.

QUESTION:: Did you drive to town in this car?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: On that particular day?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Please continue?

ANSWER:: Chairperson what would you like to know?

QUESTION:: Now you drove to town in this car on the particularday of the incident?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Was he acting as a result of your instructions?

ANSWER:: I must make it very, very clear that no disciplinedmember of the ANC would give such an instruction to kill a person,no disciplined member of the ANC would do such a thing.

QUESTION:: Yes but you knew, you were travelling withhim to town, what was your attitude, you knew what he was planningto do in town.

ANSWER:: That's correct, I spoke to Roland and I triedto persuade him and he said that the order and instructions camefrom the community and he must carry them out.

QUESTION:: Were you aware of these instructions?

ANSWER:: Yes, yes I had heard about these instructions.

QUESTION:: The other applicant, Mr Nkompondo(?), was hea member of the ANC Youth League?

ANSWER:: Yes that's correct he was a member of the YouthLeague.

QUESTION:: Were you aware of his conduct and actions?

ANSWER:: No I wouldn't say that I was aware of his actions,there were so many incidents here in Maokeng that I wasn't personallyaware of each and every incident, I can't remember them all.

QUESTION:: Let us talk about the last applicant, JosephSukudu. You know what he did?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Was he also a member of the ANC Youth League?

ANSWER:: According to Matshabe he was a member of theYouth League. Do you want to know what the organisation's viewwas?

QUESTION:: Yes.

ANSWER:: I'd heard about this Joseph Sukudu incident,Joseph having killed this white person. The ANC never foughtagainst the colour of a person's skin, the ANC never gave instructionsto kill anybody, what Joseph Sukudu did I would like, on behalfof the ANC I would like to condemn that in the strongest possibleterms, but I would also like to say that I think the reason whyJoseph had become involved in this incident, well South Africawas an abnormal society at the time of the previous governmentmade murderers of our children. The previous government pittedblack against white and that is what I can say as far as thatincident is concerned.

QUESTION:: Would it be correct Mr Bloem if I tell youthat the ANC as a result of your answers to my questions, thatthe ANC did not associate itself with Joseph's act?

ANSWER:: No not at all and that's why I'd like to repeatit today. The ANC would never condone or accept that anybodymust be killed.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MOTSEPE

JUDGE WILSON:: You have told us you were a co-accusedat the trial of Roland.

ANSWER:: That is correct.

JUDGE WILSON:: You were represented there?

ANSWER:: Yes that is correct.

JUDGE WILSON:: You pleaded guilty?

ANSWER:: Yes that's also correct.

JUDGE WILSON:: Not to the murder.

ANSWER:: Yes that's correct.

JUDGE WILSON:: You put in a Section 112 statement is thatcorrect?

ANSWER:: Yes.

JUDGE WILSON:: Set out to the Court what your versionof the facts was.

ANSWER:: Yes.

JUDGE WILSON:: Do you remember what it said?

ANSWER:: No this happened in 1992 and we are now in 1996so I don't recall.

JUDGE WILSON:: Would you like to look at that document?

ANSWER:: Yes. Chairperson if you could perhaps posethe question then I will answer the question.

JUDGE WILSON:: Is this the Section 112 statement you madeto the Court?

ANSWER:: Yes that's correct.

JUDGE WILSON:: In it you said that on Tuesday afternoon,25 February you discovered that Roland and others had not leftbut had used the money that you'd given to them to buy liquorand when you found them at your house that afternoon they'd clearlybeen drinking although they were not drunk.

ANSWER:: Yes.

JUDGE WILSON:: You said how angry you were with them andyou took them to town to find out what the taxi fares would befor them to go home.

ANSWER:: Yes that is correct.

JUDGE WILSON:: That was the purpose for going to town?

ANSWER:: Yes.

JUDGE WILSON:: You then returned to your car and wentto the house of Cecile, a friend, whom you wanted to borrow moneyfrom to pay for their taxi fares for them to go home.

ANSWER:: Yes.

JUDGE WILSON:: She was not at home and while you werewaiting there accused No 2, Roland, told you what he had done?

ANSWER:: Yes that is correct.

JUDGE WILSON:: You were shocked and upset?

ANSWER:: Yes.

JUDGE WILSON:: I understood you told us a few minutesago that you drove to town with him, you knew what he plannedto do?

ANSWER:: Yes.

JUDGE WILSON:: Did you know before he murdered this manhe was going to do it which is not what you said in your 112 statement.

ANSWER:: Right, I'm not going to explain. It's entirelycorrect what is stated here, the situation and circumstances inwhich we were at the time forced us to make this kind of statementbut today I came here and I'm going to say exactly what happened.

JUDGE WILSON:: What you did in fact Senator was to deceivethe Court to avoid your own guilt, don't tell me about the circumstances,talk about this case. You were facing a charge and you deceivedthe Court into believing you did not know the murder was to takeplace, is that correct Senator?

ANSWER:: Chairperson, I'm going to repeat this. Thecircumstances in which we found ourselves forced us to make thiskind of statement. We did not trust the South African courts,we were not free to speak the truth, that's why we had to makethis kind of statement.

JUDGE WILSON:: ...you did not tell the Court the truth,you are admitting that on oath now Senator?

ANSWER:: Yes that's correct, yes I lied because I didnot trust the courts.

JUDGE WILSON:: I suggest to you Senator that you liedto avoid conviction, that you put the blame onto Roland. CanI have that statement back please? What have you got to sayabout that, your statement helped to convict him didn't it?

ANSWER:: No I don't think my statement helped to convictRoland.

JUDGE WILSON:: He pleaded not guilty and you in your statementsaid that he admitted committing the murder.

ANSWER:: I say that I simply don't believe that my statementcontributed to Roland's conviction.

JUDGE WILSON:: I have no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY JUDGE WILSON

QUESTIONS BY CHAIRPERSON

CHAIRPERSON:: Mr Bloem what position did you hold withinthe ANC at the time?

ANSWER:: As I said I was the Deputy Chairperson of thebranch at the time.

CHAIRPERSON:: You made reference to protest marches andboycotts that had been organised by the ANC at the time. Whichprotest marches and boycotts were interfered with or broken bymembers of the Three Million gang, do you remember that?

ANSWER:: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON:: Were these protest marches of any politicalsignificance to the ANC?

ANSWER:: Yes, you see there was a Civic Association andthe ANC was there and we organised these protest actions and marchesjointly.

CHAIRPERSON:: Were they meant to be peaceful protests?

ANSWER:: Yes peaceful at all times, that was our intention.

CHAIRPERSON:: Were they viewed as some of the methodsby the ANC to achieve through peaceful means, some political objectives?

ANSWER:: Yes that's correct.

CHAIRPERSON:: The interference of these protest marchesand boycotts by the Three Million gang did they have the effectof frustrating those methods and tactics of the ANC.

ANSWER:: Yes most definitely, it certainly frustratedthe community and the organisation.

CHAIRPERSON:: You said that you made, you and some otherleaders, made representations to some authorities when violencewas striking the area. Can you tell us a little bit more whatexactly, what you did?

ANSWER:: Yes Chairperson, I and Reverend Gozongo approachedthe Minister of Law and Order, Adriaan Vlok, and we asked himto intervene in this conflict and violent situation in Kroonstadbut it was useless. Myself and Mr Breytenbach, the Deputy Ministerof Defence, we sent a delegation from Maokeng to have a meetingwith Mr Breytenbach - he was stationed in Kroonstad. We spoketo him, the community leaders, the taxi people, business people,teachers, everybody, everybody involved in Kroonstad communityattended this meeting and held a meeting with Mr Breytenbach,but nothing helped. The Premier, (indistinct) Lekotha contactedand liaised with the police at a very high level and had variousmeetings but to no avail. He was not the Premier then, he wasn't.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY CHAIRPERSON

QUESTIONS BY ?

QUESTION:: Was he one of the leaders of the ANC?

ANSWER:: Yes let me just explain. Mr Lekotha comes fromKroonstad, his mother lives here in Kroonstad and he was raisedhere. He is a community leader of Kroonstad to this day.

QUESTIONS BY ANOTHER MEMBER OF COMMITTEE

QUESTION:: Mr Bloem, the deceased Mr Diwiti came to youon more than one occasion and asked you that there must be peace?

ANSWER:: Yes that's correct.

QUESTION:: On the first occasion he actually came to youof his own accord?

ANSWER:: Yes that's correct.

QUESTION:: At the talks, the peace talks his life wasthreatened?

ANSWER:: Yes correct.

QUESTION:: So that you had to remove him from the scene?

ANSWER:: That's correct.

QUESTION:: At your house his life was once again in danger?

ANSWER:: Correct.

QUESTION:: His life was once again under threat by theANC Youth League?

ANSWER:: I wouldn't say it's the ANC Youth League becausethe Youth League would never have done that to me, the SDU...

QUESTION:: The SDU members?

ANSWER:: Yes that's correct.

QUESTION:: The Chairperson of the SDU was also the Chairpersonof the ANC Youth League?

ANSWER:: That's correct.

QUESTION:: So Mr Diwiti's attempts to pursue peace cameto nought?

ANSWER:: Yes I think I must just answer this quite carefully. Mr Diwiti, George, came to me twice so that we could have peacediscussions and talks and on two occasions there were, came tonothing.

QUESTION:: Were the two of you friends?

ANSWER:: Please repeat the question.

QUESTION:: Were you and him friends or did he only approachyou in his capacity as a leader?

ANSWER:: After Mr Diwiti was released from prison, hewas detained for some offence, I met him in 1989.

QUESTION:: You were aware that for his part there wasa desire for peace?

ANSWER:: Yes that's correct.

QUESTION:: Yes on that day you went with on that day youknew he was going to be killed?

ANSWER:: No not at all, I did not take Diwiti to be killed,I went along so that we could talk so that we could solve thisproblem.

QUESTION:: I think there is a bit of confusion here, we'renot talking about the same incident. You travelled along withPetrus in the car knowing full well that Petrus was planning tokill Diwiti.

ANSWER:: Yes as I said in my explanation I pleaded withPetrus to try and persuade him not to do this but he refused andhe went ahead.

QUESTION:: You didn't think that perhaps you should goalong with Petrus to try and find Diwiti and make peace again?

ANSWER:: You see at that stage my life was also in danger.

QUESTION:: Why, how so?

ANSWER:: I was under threat from the Three Million gang.

QUESTION:: So you couldn't appear freely in the streets?

ANSWER:: Yes for about a year I did not go to town, Icould not put my foot there because the whole town belonged tothem.

QUESTION:: Apart now from the threats directed at theANC members, were they a band of criminals who committed othercrimes as well or did they concentrate on political violence?

ANSWER:: You see previously before the police got a strangleholdon this gang, these people were common township gangsters, itwas a township gang.

QUESTION:: The day when the Premier Milling people cameto arrest them do you think such an arrest would have taken placewithout any bloodshed?

ANSWER:: You see the Premier Milling Company employeeshad done so in the past, I think it was in 1986 or 87, the PremierMilling people, the workers had arrested some of the Three Milliongang members and taken them to the charge office at (indistinct).

QUESTION:: So the Three Million gang had existed for quitea long time here, not only from 1986 onwards?

ANSWER:: Yes that's correct.

QUESTION:: I'm repeating myself now, do you think thearrest on that particular day, in the light of the circumstancesat the time, do you think that arrest could have taken place withoutbloodshed?

ANSWER:: The Premier Milling group notified the policethat they were on their way and the police were present, that'swhy the Premier Milling group never thought that there would bebloodshed because the police were present to maintain law andorder.

QUESTION:: Yes but now here we see a private group comingto arrest another group and the police intervene and keep themapart?

ANSWER:: Yes that is in fact what happened.

QUESTION:: One further aspect I'd like to clarify, asregards their disrupting the various protest actions, is it yourevidence that they didn't actually do anything their mere presencecaused people to disband and to run away?

ANSWER:: No you see what happened at the Kroonstad taxirank is that many people were intimidated and advised to go andshop in town and that they should not heed people telling themnot to go and buy, shop in town. Pick 'n Pay, the manager ofPick 'n Pay, it was known that Diwiti would go to him during theseconsumer boycotts, he would go and assure the managing directorthat people would come and shop there.

QUESTION:: Yes but my question is that they did not attackthe people but the people were so afraid of them that they ranaway of their own accord when they saw the gang?

ANSWER:: No they also attacked people, if the people didn'twant to listen they would attack.

QUESTION:: Yes but I am talking about the protest actionsand the boycotts.

ANSWER:: No they did not attack people there.

QUESTION:: As soon as people saw the gang coming thenthe people simply fled.

ANSWER:: Yes.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MEMBER OF COMMITTEE

FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MEMBER OF COMMITTEE

QUESTION:: You said just now that the Three Million gangcame into existence from about 1986/87. Were they constantlyactive until 1990/91 or was there a period when they were dormant?

ANSWER:: Yes between 86/87 and 90 there was a period ofquietness, of calm.

QUESTION:: Were they then in prison during that period,the leaders?

ANSWER:: Yes I think Diwiti was in prison during thoseyears.

QUESTIONS BY MS KHAMPEPE

QUESTION:: Mr Bloem I have just two questions for you. Is the Three Million gang still in existence?

ANSWER:: No they do not exist anymore.

QUESTION:: Have they become extinct?

ANSWER:: After the leader, Diwiti's, death the gang disbandedthey were no longer in existence.

QUESTION:: Petrus, your relative has given testimony beforeus that after the death of Diwiti there was a noticeable changein your community in that whereas the violence was the order ofthe day during his lifetime, after his death peace and tranquillitydescended on the community. Would you like to comment on that?

ANSWER:: Certainly Chairperson, I'm going to illustratewhat joy there was in the community of Maokeng the day when Diwitiwas shot dead. It was worse than when Nelson Mandela was freed. Up until today it is quiet and peaceful in Kroonstad. Schoolswere disrupted, businesses were disrupted, taxis were disruptedand so were churches, nobody could do anything in Kroonstad whenthe Three Million gang were still in existence. There is peaceand nobody can say today that I am lying, there is peace in Kroonstad.

QUESTION:: Senator if immediately after Diwiti's deathsuch peace reigned in this community, would you agree that therewas no need for further killings of other members of the ThreeMillion gang?

ANSWER:: Chairperson I would like to answer this as follows. We have never approved of murder. I don't think that it wasnecessary to take anybody's life before Diwiti or after Diwiti. I cannot agree that anybody needed to be killed.

QUESTION:: We have actually listened to evidence by someof the applicants to the effect that they had to protect the communityand in protecting the community certain killings had to be committed. Your evidence is that there was no need for further killingafter the death of Diwiti, do I understand you properly?

ANSWER:: Yes I agree completely that, I just want to reiteratethat I will never agree with the killing of anybody, whether itwas before Diwiti's death or after Diwiti's death, I don't thinkanybody can condone murder.

QUESTION:: You have also testified that there was a meetingbetween yourself and Mr Msibi, an official of the IFP? Wheredid Mr Msibi live at the time of your meeting, where was he staying?

ANSWER:: Yes he came from Welkom, actually he phoned MrLefafa to make the arrangement, the appointment, and Mr Lefafaphoned me and Reverend Gozongo and told us that this person wantedto have a meeting with us about the Three Million gang and thoseof his members, that's what he said. He went back to Welkom.

QUESTION:: Did you not take the opportunity to discusswith him the involvement of his party with the Three Million gang?

ANSWER:: I assume that Mr Msibi was a senior officialin the IFP and the meeting which we held was enough to talk abouthis members, he said that they were members of his organisationand I assumed that that was sufficient.

QUESTION:: ...to the Three Million gang?

ANSWER:: The Three Million gang started out very smallbut it eventually grew until it had about 45 or 50 members.

QUESTION:: Were these members recruited within the ranksof the ANC?

ANSWER:: You see the situation which people found themselvesin Trobo was such that if you were not a part of the Three Milliongang your life was in danger. Many of these young people hadno clue what it was all about but their parents lived there andthey had to become part of the Three Million.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS KHAMPEPE

WITNESS IS EXCUSED

MR MOTSEPE ADDRESSES COMMITTEE

Thank you Mr Chairman, this then brings me to the end of theevidence that I will lead on behalf of all the applicants I amappearing on behalf and I just wish to point out that there isanother application of Boteta(?) whom I would have appeared forbut my instructions is that that application should be removedfrom the role and I request that that is application No A I amtold and I thus request that it be recorded as such.

CHAIRMAN:: What is the position in that regard, is theapplication being withdrawn altogether or just removed from therole?

MR MOTSEPE:: Mr Chairman I think it should be removedfrom the role.

CHAIRMAN:: Very well, the application of Boteta will beremoved from the role.

MR MOTSEPE:: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman on thepart of the amnesty I will call the next of kin to George Ramasimongto the witness stand.

CHAIRMAN:: What is the name of the witness?

MR MOTSEPE:: Florence Mamorena Taje.

FLORENCE MAMORENA TAJE (ss)

EXAMINATION BY MR (?)

QUESTION:: Mamorena are you a sister to George Ramasimongwho was known as Diwiti?

ANSWER:: Yes it's like that.

QUESTION:: Between you and Diwiti who is the oldest?

ANSWER:: I am the oldest.

QUESTION:: Could you please speak louder? Mrs Taje Iwould ask you to tell this Committee whether you are any memberof any political organisation?

ANSWER:: I am an ANC member. [Interjections from spectators].

QUESTION:: Please give this lady a chance to speak, don'tdisturb her please because we want everyone to be afforded anopportunity to tell her story here. If you have a problem withthat we will be forced to conduct this business maybe in secrecy. We don't want you to be absent when she testifies but pleasedon't cause the Committee to conduct the hearings in your absencebecause this will disadvantage you. You are also spoiling yourchances of hearing what she says. (Discussion as to positioningof microphones). Mrs Taje you have just told us that you arean ANC member?

ANSWER:: Yes sir.

QUESTION:: When did you become an ANC member?

ANSWER:: I became a member in 1985 but I received thecard, that is the ANC card in 1990, it was about in June month.

QUESTION:: Were you occupying any position in this organisation?

ANSWER:: Yes I was a secretary in the Women's League thatis at Regional level.

QUESTION:: Besides being a secretary in the ANC or theWomen's League was there any other thing or did you have any otherfunction in the ANC?

ANSWER:: I was also a committee member of the MDCC hereat Maokeng and this is the organisation that help us to make thecouncil resign.

QUESTION:: Were you in the organisation which was againstthe town council at the time?

ANSWER:: Yes sir.

QUESTION:: Is it true that you were once a delegate ofthe ANC Youth League when you went to Bloemfontein, that is theWomen's League I am sorry.

ANSWER:: We went to Durban, we went to Durban to launchthe ANC Women's League.

QUESTION:: When I talked to you before you came here wetalked about what you did regarding bringing peace here at Maokeng,do you still remember that?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Can you tell this Committee about your efforts?

ANSWER:: I went with Comrade Dennis and Stoffel Mofokengand the other members from the MDCC we went to court and Diwitihad a case on 11 September in 1990. We went to speak to himthere and tell him that they must come to Mr Gozongo's place thereis a meeting at 6 so that we could hold discussions about peacebetween us and SAYCO(?). After doing that in the afternoon oneof the comrades came to me and told me that I mustn't allow Diwitithem to go to Mr Gozongo's place because he would be attacked. I didn't tell him because I knew the leaders would be presentthat won't happen. Whilst we were still there at Reverend Gozongo'splace, Comrade Dennis and Stoffel wanted to address the meetingand they realised that the youth was not enough there and afterrealising this they asked where the youth were because they wantto know what the fight was all about.

QUESTION:: You may continue.

ANSWER:: One of our comrades stood up and said the youthis at Pumelung(?) at the club, they said they won't come therethey don't want to make peace between them and Diwiti. Thencomrade Dennis told them that it is very important people, yousay Diwiti want to fight the youth, there's nothing like that,let the youth come here and hear what the problem is and thensome people went and brought the youth back. When the youtharrived they entered inside and when they were inside comradeStoffel stood up and explained and Dennis also stood up and triedto explain. While he was doing that one of the leaders wentoutside and they started quarrelling and said they don't wantto speak to Diwiti because he's a criminal and then one of ourcomrades who is dead now, he was called comrade Matabela he saiddon't say this person is a criminal and that's where the attacksstarted. Comrade Dennis took us in his car, I was together withDiwiti and Stoffel Mofokeng, I can't remember the other one whowas with us, we went with him in his car and one other child whocomes after me at home went away. Before we could alight thecar there were four kombis and they attacked, they tried to attackus and we went away where we went to the police station in town.

QUESTION:: I think ma'am you were still here when comradeDennis Bloem testified do you still remember that he talked aboutwhat you are talking about now?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: I want you now to tell me about the letterthat came to your place, do you still remember about that?

ANSWER:: Yes, we heard a car hooting outside while wewere still at home and Mr Matile's wife came out and they saidthey were looking for Diwiti. It was comrade Dennis and Blackieand Ronald, that is the one that killed Diwiti. When they gotthere Diwiti was not there and Matile went outside Matile a letterand Dennis then shook his head at that time and then he went insideand Matile brought the letter into the house. Diwiti was notat home that night and Monday we met him at court. The casewent on and then it finished.

QUESTION:: You say Ronald Petrus produced a letter, didyou see that letter?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Can you read?

ANSWER:: Yes I read that letter, it was written in English.

QUESTION:: What did that letter say?

ANSWER:: It was a letter pleading for peace between thepeople who were fighting and Diwiti had to answer before, I don'tremember whether it was before four or five days and that letterhad been signed by M K (indistinct).

QUESTION:: What was the date at that time?

ANSWER:: It was on 23 February.

QUESTION:: Which year?

ANSWER:: 1992.

QUESTION:: What happened to that letter?

ANSWER:: We kept that letter and then Amay(?) informedDiwiti about that peace letter and he was satisfied. In theevening after we went to court one of the informers came and toldus that he was very threatened, there are people from Johannesburgthey are about to kill Diwiti and they know he is going to courtthis week, that is why they are going to wait for Diwiti. Thatperson asked me whether Diwiti is there and I said yes he is herebut the person told me please tell Diwiti he musn't go to courtand then I went to Diwiti and told him that there are people fromJohannesburg who came here to kill you. He said no I have justreceived a peace letter, where is that letter. The letter wasstill with me and I showed it to him, he read it and he said peoplewant us to defy, this letter had been signed by Amay and he'san M K member, it means those are people which are coming forpeace which I already wanted in Maokeng. Again he said thisletter had been brought by Dennis and you know Dennis had workedfor peace all along. Then what I can tell you is that my sister,you don't understand, maybe the message has reached the regionaloffice because...

QUESTION:: When Diwiti was speaking to you did he seemlike someone who would work for peace?

ANSWER:: Yes he was very free(?) at that time.

QUESTION:: You said to me on the day Diwiti was killedyou were together with him at court in town?

ANSWER:: Yes I was there.

QUESTION:: Were you still listening when they were talkingabout Diwiti's killing?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: How do you feel about this?

ANSWER:: I would like this Committee to bring justicebecause in the first place the person who killed Diwiti doesn'treside here and he doesn't know Diwiti and I can't say anythingmore regarding his killing.

QUESTION:: One objective of this Committee is to makepeople reconcile, can you hear that?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: How do you regard this reconciliation regardingthe plea which has been made by these killers?

ANSWER:: I want people to reconcile but I wanted to sayto the Committee that justice must prevail because the personwho killed Diwiti has done nothing to me and I don't know himand therefore I would justice to prevail.

QUESTION:: In other words you support the objective ofreconciliation?

ANSWER:: Yes I do.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS

QUESTIONS BY MR MATSEPE

QUESTION:: Mamorena we all know about all the evidencethat came to the fore here that there are people from the Kroonstadcommunity who died and not only Diwiti, people from both sidesdied. Do you agree with me on that?

ANSWER:: Yes I do agree with you.

QUESTION:: Do you agree that it was during violent timeshere in Kroonstad?

ANSWER:: Yes I do agree.

QUESTION:: I mean from both sides?

ANSWER:: Yes I do agree with you.

QUESTION:: You have explained here that you were a memberof the ANC Women's League in 1990?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: You were elected, you even went to the congresswhere the ANC Women's League was being launched in 1990 in Durban?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: As being elected by the regional members?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: After these killings happened here in the township,let me say in 1992, or let me put my question this way so thatyou can understand it. After Diwiti's (indistinct) Dennis mattercame to the fore and Diwiti left the Youth League, did you stillremain an ANC Women's League member?

ANSWER:: I don't know how to answer your question becausethere were no meetings that I attended at that time because youknow we were being attacked at that time, we couldn't move freely.

QUESTION:: Did you because of those attacks not relateyourself to the activities of the ANC in Kroonstad and at theregional level also?

ANSWER:: I told this to the regional office that suchand such a thing is happening here in Kroonstad and I told (indistinct)was our chairman and he asked me whether the person that perpetratedthis thing, whether he was a comrade or not and then I said itwas our SAYCO organising secretary and (indistinct) would lookinto this matter. I believe (indistinct) occasions I thoughtwe would show this programme but she never came up with a solution. From there I couldn't go anywhere.

QUESTION:: When we go to the year 1992 at the time ofthe Diwiti's killing will you say you were a member of the ANCWomen's League?

ANSWER:: I won't say I was a member because there wasno meeting that I attended, I didn't know the procedures, I didn'teven know what was happening.

QUESTION:: Is it true then that after the conflict betweenDiwiti and his gang and the SAYCO members which is the ANC YouthLeague, was there another political organisation that approachedDiwiti and his gang so that they can join them?

ANSWER:: What do you mean?

QUESTION:: I mean a political organisation.

ANSWER:: No, no other political organisation approachedDiwiti, he personally went to Welkom he said sister the ANC peoplecannot help me, I tried Dennis but these people say they don'twant to meet me. The ministers came together trying to resolvethis issue but there is no solution and then he further went onto say the person who is the Premier today came also to try toresolve the issue, he said it's better if I associate myself witha political organisation maybe there might be a solution to thisproblem.

QUESTION:: Which organisation?

ANSWER:: That is Inkatha.

QUESTION:: From there he wanted to pursue his aims underthe umbrella of Inkatha if I have to use that word?

ANSWER:: I think he didn't pursue his aims. What hewanted, he wanted that committee, the Inkatha committee becausehe'd already explained that he was a member of ANC. He thoughtthat they would come for negotiations.

QUESTION:: My question is he wanted something to happenbut the ANC and its leadership couldn't help him, then he thoughtmaybe by resolving to Inkatha his aims, if he wanted peace, maybeit would be better if he associate himself with Inkatha?

ANSWER:: Yes that's correct.

QUESTION:: From there he went on to pursue his aims underthe umbrella of this political organisation called Inkatha?

ANSWER:: Yes sir.

QUESTION:: Mamorena we are all gathered here today asMr Mpshe has already indicated, what, so many things happenedwithin this community, things that hurt us, I want you to takeout what is rooted deep inside your heart. This Committee isnot a court of law to try a person, but what message do you haveto the community of Kroonstad regarding this matter, regardingeverything that happened in the past?

ANSWER:: What do you mean brother Oupa?

QUESTION:: I mean this way, this Committee is trying toheal the wounds of this community for the bad things, I'm notreferring to the things that were committed by Diwiti, but I amreferring to all incidents that took place in the past but accordingto your will or your wish would you like to have reconciliationand peace?

ANSWER:: Yes I would like the Committee to help us thatthere should be reconciliation. Many people died, some are injail, even up to this day people are still pointing fingers atus and it is really hurting if people still point fingers at uswhile other people are dead and some are in jail. Now it seemsas if there is no peace and I would like the community of Maokengto know what happened and they should know that this was not donepurposefully. I don't know how to put it this message clearthat the evil spirit reigned in Maokeng because when a personwanted to speak something he would be made to keep quiet.

QUESTION:: In other words what happened was actually perpetratedfrom outside?

ANSWER:: Yes I think so brother Oupa because I don't understandthat an issue, a woman can make, can cause such a conflict upto this day there is no solution, we are still being pointed withfingers.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MATSEPE

QUESTIONS BY JUDGE MGOEPE

QUESTION:: You said your brother to use the words thatwere put across in the interpretation associated himself withthe IFP, did he in fact become a member?

ANSWER:: Yes that is correct.

QUESTION:: Why did he have to go to Welkom, does it meanthat there was no IFP branch here at the time?

ANSWER:: I don't know but it seems as if there was nobranch here, he says he was going to Welkom and there is an IFPbranch, he has to meet the leadership of the organisation.

QUESTION:: Do you know whether or not he established abranch here in Maokeng after he had joined in Welkom?

ANSWER:: No there was no branch here because he wantedthose people to come down so that there can be negotiations tosolve the issues. I don't remember him having a membership card.

QUESTION:: I assume obviously you attended his funeral?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Do you remember whether an IFP flag was raisedduring the funeral or there were people with IFP flags?

ANSWER:: Yes that's correct sir.

QUESTION:: I'm not so sure, I asked two questions, whatis correct?

ANSWER:: The IFP flag was raised and the members of theIFP were present at the day of the funeral.

QUESTION:: Do you know Mr (indistinct) from Welkom?

ANSWER:: Yes I know him.

QUESTION:: Was he present during the funeral?

ANSWER:: No he wasn't present.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY JUDGE MGOEPE

EXAMINATION BY JUDGE WILSON

QUESTION:: Sorry just one question I'd like to ask youabout and I may have misheard what you said (tape ends, questionlost)...what did you mean by that, can you develop it a little,tell me what woman and what conflict?

ANSWER:: As I've already explained that it is allegedthat Diwiti was fighting, George was being fought against becauseof his wife and I didn't think that an issue involving a womancould cause such a great confusion.

QUESTION:: You say he was being fought against becauseof his wife? Why was that, what was she doing to cause peopleto want to fight against him?

ANSWER:: The meeting that I've referred to with DennisBloem it was the meeting to call SAYCO organisation to clear thefact that Diwiti is not fighting SAYCO, he was fighting Georgebecause George is in love with his wife, that is where he wasattacked.

QUESTION:: Do you mean George Daniels?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Did he hold office in any party, George Daniels?

ANSWER:: He was the organising secretary of SAYCO.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY JUDGE WILSON

EXAMINATION BY MS KHAMPEPE

QUESTION:: Is it Miss or Mrs Taje?

ANSWER:: Mrs.

QUESTION:: Mrs Taje do you believe that Petrus Rolandswas an active member of the ANC Youth League in Kroonstad?

ANSWER:: I don't believe so, I don't believe that.

QUESTION:: Mrs Taje can you explain the reason why youdon't believe he was an active member of the Youth League here?

ANSWER:: Because I was also a member of the ANC and Iknow the activists.

QUESTION:: Did you know Senator Bloem very well?

ANSWER:: I know him very well.

QUESTION:: Do you know all the members of his family?

ANSWER:: I know them perfectly well I was schooling withsome of them.

QUESTION:: Did you know Roland Petrus?

ANSWER:: I don't know him at all.

QUESTION:: You have never seen him before he came to delivera letter at your house?

ANSWER:: I saw him only when he brought the letter andI saw him that time only.

QUESTION:: Was that the only time you ever saw him?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Have you renounced your ANC membership, areyou no longer a member of the ANC?

ANSWER:: I'm now a member of the ANC again.

QUESTION:: When last did you resign, when did you resignpreviously?

ANSWER:: I never resigned I just stayed at home but whenthings went back to normal I took an initiative to join again.

QUESTION:: You mean in fact you have never resigned fromthe ANC but you have now become active in the activities?

ANSWER:: That is correct.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS KHAMPEPE

WITNESS IS EXCUSED

MR MPSHE:: Mr Chairman the next of kin to the deceasedor the victims in all other applications will not testify Mr Chairman,but I may put it on record that they were contacted, they wereinformed and they have been with us during the proceedings. Thank you Mr Chairman.

MR DE JAGER:: Mr Mpshe would you like to supply theirnames so that they could be forwarded to the Avend(?) A Committee?

MR MPSHE:: Mr Chairman that can be done today. Mr Chairmanthe next step are submissions or arguments by both of us here. Mr Chairman we have agreed, due to time constraints, that wedo not argue viva voce today, but we make written submissionsat a later stage if the Committee agrees Mr Chairman. My learnedfriend can confirm that arrangement.

MR MATSEPE:: I confirm Mr Chairman.

CHAIRMAN:: By when will the submissions be made?

MR MPSHE:: Mr Chairman my colleague says that two weekswill be sufficient to submit the document.

CHAIRMAN:: Mr Matsepe is that correct?

MR MATSEPE:: That is correct Mr Chairman.

CHAIRMAN:: Not after two weeks but within two weeks?

MR MPSHE:: Within two weeks.

CHAIRMAN:: You will send your heads to the office in CapeTown Mr Matsepe?

MR MATSEPE:: Yes.

CHAIRMAN:: Yes.

JUDGE MGOEPE:: Mr Mpshe and Mr Matsepe, I thought I wouldask the previous witness but I missed by opportunity. Can youtell us what Sayco is between the two of you?

MR MATSEPE:: South African Youth Congress.

JUDGE MGOEPE:: Thank you.

MR MATSEPE:: Mr Chairman may I just add this this SouthAfrican Youth Congress in my information this is the Congressthat subsequently transformed into what later, at least as faras the Free State is concerned and this area, the ANC Youth League. Mr Chairman I am then going to ask for a short adjournment forus to resume and start with another application, as arranged.

CHAIRMAN:: Very well we will take a short adjournment.

COMMISSION ADJOURNS - ON RESUMPTION

(NAME OF WITNESS UNKNOWN)

EXAMINATION BY MR VAN DER MERWE

QUESTION:: At the time of your conviction what was youroccupation?

ANSWER:: No 137 (indistinct) Location, Venter's (indistinct).

QUESTION:: At the time of your conviction what was youroccupation?

ANSWER:: I was a teacher.

QUESTION:: Are you married?

ANSWER:: Yes I am married.

QUESTION:: Do you have any children?

ANSWER:: Yes I have children.

QUESTION:: Ages please.

ANSWER:: The first born is 2 years three months old andthe second born is one year old, one year one month old.

QUESTION:: Will you just tell the Committee what standarddid you pass at school?

ANSWER:: I finished matric and I had a teacher's certificate.

QUESTION:: Is it true that you also were enlisted in thepolice force on 18 August 1987?

ANSWER:: May you please clarify the question?

QUESTION:: Is it true that you were enlisted into thepolice force, the South African Police Force on 18 August 1987?

ANSWER:: Yes it's true.

QUESTION:: Could you just state the reasons why you decidedon a career in the police?

ANSWER:: Do you mean during those years? During thoseyears a black child's education was not up to a high standardand therefore one would find it difficult to obtain a job. Theonly job that was available was to become a policeman so thatI can earn some money and proceed with my life.

QUESTION:: You in fact retired before this convictionin this matter from the police force, is that true?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Did you resign from the police force on 5 February1993?

ANSWER:: Yes it's true.

QUESTION:: Can you tell the Committee why you resignedor what were the grounds for your resignation?

ANSWER:: I resigned from the police when I realised thatthe job I had was about to put me in trouble and I also, onlygave reasons that I want to continue with my education but thatwas not the truth.

QUESTION:: For your resignation from the police force?

ANSWER:: Because politically things were on a high standardhere in South Africa, I was in the ANC organisation and I wasa supporter at the (indistinct). There are also other policemembers who came to know about that and I heard people talkingabout that and I thought this will put me in trouble.

QUESTION:: Were any remarks passed by any superior officersin this regard, to your membership or support of the ANC or anyother liberation movement or political organisation?

ANSWER:: Two such people had such remarks regarding politics.

QUESTION:: Who were they?

ANSWER:: The first one was W/O Engelbrecht who was stationedat Ventersberg and the second one was Col Botha who was stationedat Welkom.

QUESTION:: What were the remarks passed by these gentlemen?ANSWER: It happened that while we were attending a lectureW/O Engelbrecht harassed one of the policemen and then I saidto him he must realise that times are changing and this thingof harassment won't be again accepted by the police, and he saidhe had been watching me I came to Ventersberg as a communist.

QUESTION:: Were you ever a member, a formal member ofany political organisation?

ANSWER:: No I was only an ANC supporter, not a member.

QUESTION:: When did you become an ANC supporter?

ANSWER:: It was in 1990.

QUESTION:: Just tell the Committee at that point in timewere policemen given permission or entitled to join any politicalmovement or party, what was the official policy of the PoliceServices then?

ANSWER:: Police were under threats, I can talk about this,black policemen because while I was still working I was a criminalinvestigating officer and I realised that there are some whitepolicemen who were attending the white political organisations'meetings. But if you were black and people came to know, thepolice came to know that you are a political organisation's memberyou would be sent to a trial department.

QUESTION:: If I am correct, then there was a policy principlefrom the Police Services that police members or police officersmay not have been members of inter alia the AWB, was thisalso the policy regarding the ANC and other movements?

ANSWER:: I might say regarding the whites, this thingwas only said but in reality they took part in political organisationsbecause they were still in power at that time. On the side ofthe black policemen this was emphasised that we were not supposedto enter into political organisations.

QUESTION:: Is it true that you only became a formal memberof the ANC during September 1993 and you still hold membershipwith the ANC?

ANSWER:: Yes it's true.

QUESTION:: Can you state the reasons why you didn't openlyand actively become a member of the ANC or a prescribed memberof the ANC during that period 1990 to September 93?

ANSWER:: We were preparing for the elections in 1993,that is the 1994 elections and therefore (indistinct) is a smalltownship who had to be strong there in the ANC organisation.

QUESTION:: You became a member of the ANC during September1993 being the date after your conviction and sentence in theRegional Court at Kroonstad. Did you in any way actively supportany liberation movement or any political organisation?

ANSWER:: I was also a member of SANCO, that is the (indistinct)branch of SANCO.

QUESTION:: For the record what does SANCO stand for?

ANSWER:: SANCO stands for South African National CivicsOrganisation.

QUESTION:: What were the aims of this organisation?

ANSWER:: SANCO's objective was, especially when it cameto the black authorities in the township, we must develop or continueour objectives, SANCO must carry forward the complaints or thedemands of the community so that the community could be proudof their lives.

QUESTION:: Was it only based in the township or was italso active in other parts of cities and towns?

ANSWER:: It operated mostly in the black townships.

QUESTION:: Did you bear office with this organisationat any point in time?

ANSWER:: Yes.

QUESTION:: Would you state in what capacity and from whatdate until when?

ANSWER:: In December 1992 I was elected as secretary.

JUDGE MGOEPE:: Can I just interrupt you on that point,according to the documents from the office of the Attorney-General,and I'm not sure what the judgment is saying, the applicant facedthree counts of attempted murder and then one of malicious damageto property and then attempted robbery. In his application hesupplied, if one looks at his application form he's applying foramnesty only in respect of one conviction.

MR V D MERWE:: That is right Mr Chairman.

JUDGE MGOEPE:: I just wanted to make sure so that we shouldnot bother ourselves with the rest of the counts.

MR V D MERWE:: That is in fact true, the charge that weare attending to is one of attempted robbery with aggravatingcircumstances, that was the first charge. The first count theredated 26 August 1993, that matter we will be addressing today.

JUDGE WILSON:: Attempted what?

MR V D MERWE:: Robbery Mr Chairman.

JUDGE WILSON:: But the form you have submitted relatesto attempted murder, there is no mention of robbery you have notasked for amnesty in respect of attempted robbery. You are boundby the form you have submitted and as my brother has just pointedout to you, the application you have submitted relates to an applicationfor amnesty in respect of attempted murder.

MR V D MERWE:: Mr Chairman that is true, I myself wasnot involved in the drafting of the application. The secondcharge that is connected to the first charge that was the sameincident, that is in fact the attempted murder.

JUDGE WILSON:: The first charge isn't before us, you'veseen the Act?

MR V D MERWE:: Yes I've seen the Act.

JUDGE WILSON:: If someone applies for amnesty he has todo so on the prescribed form. There is no such prescribed formin respect of anything except one count of attempted murder.

CHAIRMAN:: Do you want to take instructions or what doyou want us to do because...

MR V D MERWE:: Mr Chairman I was under the impressionthat although I agree with the submissions made by the Commissionerand I've discussed it with my client because I also noticed it,he was under the impression that he was in fact committed, convictedon a charge of attempted murder being the second charge. I wasunder the impression that by means of the evidence here we couldhave this matter condoned, to have the attempted murder...

JUDGE MGOEPE:: Would it help if we were to adjourn a littlebit, you sort yourself out with your client and then specify preciselyin respect of which count he wants to apply for amnesty and thenif it is one count of attempted murder please identify the victimand then we'll take it from there. I'm not saying the Committee,I can't speak for the Committee, we will take it further fromthere to see what we can do about that, because we don't wantto listen to evidence not knowing exactly in respect of whichcharge the application is.

MR V D MERWE:: Thank you Mr Chairman there is no needfor an adjournment it's true that the only charge that we willapply for amnesty is the first charge, being that of attemptedrobbery with aggravating circumstances.

JUDGE MGOEPE:: Sorry first charge, what are you referringto when you say the first charge, what document are you lookingat I'm looking at the document, the documents that are referredto is attempted murder, three counts.

JUDGE WILSON:: I can help my brother, if you look at thejudgment which we've just been given, in the third line it sayswhat the counts are "klagte 1 en 5 is aanklagte van pogingtot roof...aanklagte 2 and 3 is aanklagte van poging tot moord...."

MR V D MERWE:: The victims are stated in the first charge,it is a certain Mr Helepe and a Mr Seping the police officersat that point in time.

JUDGE WILSON:: But it doesn't appear on the form so Ithink the form ought to be filled in properly.

MR V D MERWE:: Could I apply then for an amendment ofthe application to have the charge of attempted murder and thenjust amended by referring to attempted robbery by which is includedaggravating circumstances?

JUDGE MGOEPE:: Attempted robbery?

MR V D MERWE:: That is attempted robbery, that was thefirst count on which the applicant is...

JUDGE MGOEPE:: Do you know who the victim is?

MR V D MERWE:: The victims were one L A Helepe and/orS W Seping. This is the only count of the four counts on whichthe applicant was convicted that we would apply amnesty for sir.

JUDGE MGOEPE:: Mr Mpshe have any of the victims relatingto this count been notified?

MR MPSHE:: Yes Mr Chairman they were notified, they areactually present in the hall right now.

JUDGE MGOEPE:: They are present?

MR MPSHE:: They are present.

CHAIRMAN:: Very well your application to amend the applicationis granted to read that amnesty is now sought for the crime forwhich he had been convicted, namely attempted robbery. Did Iunderstand you to say attempted robbery with aggravating circumstances?

MR V D MERWE:: That is correct yes.

CHAIRMAN:: Paragraph 9(a)(i) of the form is to be amended.

MR V S MERWE:: Thank you Mr Chairman.

MR MATSEPE:: May I ask for an indulgence Mr Chairman andmembers of the Committee, if the amendment is accepted and itwould read attempted robbery with aggravating circumstances, thenI would request Mr Chairman and the Committee to for record purposesto state that despite the fact that the crime convicted of doesnot...

CHAIRMAN:: It seems to us that the applicant in this casewill have to reapply. He will have to supply satisfactory motivationfor the offence in respect of which he now seeks amnesty, hispresent form does not deal with that at all. It may be thatonce he has submitted a fresh application and attached to it therelevant documents relating to the charge against him and anyother document which might be relevant, it may then be possiblefor us to consider whether the application should be set downon another occasion for a hearing or whether it is necessary atall for the matter to be decided at a public hearing. In termsof the Act it may well be, if all the documents are adequatelybefore us, it may well be possible for us to deal with this applicationwithout the necessity of a public hearing. This is the unanimousand considered view of the Committee.

MR V D MERWE:: I apologise for any inconvenience causedby this application.

MR MPSHE:: Mr Chairman with your permission we move onto the next application, that of Jackson, Mr Chairman that willbe "H" in the Bundle. Mr Chairman I consider the applicationto be in order and Jackson is also represented by Mr Van der Merwe.

CHAIRMAN:: At what page is the application form in application"H"?

MR MPSHE:: Page 2 of "H".

CHAIRMAN:: This is Case No 25.

MR JACKSON (ss)

EXAMINATION BY MR VAN DER MERWE

QUESTION:: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Jackson could youjust for the record state you physical home address?

ANSWER:: 2705 Masilo Location, near Tennyson.

QUESTION:: Are you married?

ANSWER:: No.

QUESTION:: Have you got any children?

ANSWER:: I have one kid.

QUESTION:: How old is this kid?

ANSWER:: The child is three years and a few months now.

QUESTION:: Is it true that you were convicted of the murderof a police officer and you were sentenced to twelve and a halfyears' imprisonment on that charge?

ANSWER:: That is correct sir.

QUESTION:: Could you just tell the Committee how did thishappen that you killed this police officer?

ANSWER:: On 22 April 1993 it happened that the communityat Masilo complained about a white person who was selling milkmixed with water and this milk was sold to the community of Masilo. It happened that we burned the car as the community of Masiloand thereafter the police arrive. These were the SAPS and ontheir arrival the very same police that I happened to kill arrivedand he harassed us, he was talking bad to us, we were togetherwith other comrades and it happened that he saw me among them,he saw me in this whole group of people burning the car. Hepointed at me, he had a gun and he pointed his finger at me, hesaid it is not the first time that he saw me at the forefront,especially when we were fighting as the community of Masilo. Fighting those oppressive things by the previous regime.

QUESTION:: You see that selling the milk with the extrawater in is oppression of the people, could you define that?

ANSWER:: To sell milk mixed with water I would say it'soppression to the people because it was not the first time complainingabout this kind of milk or some property that was sold to theblack people in the township, for an example rotting meat, thatwould never be taken to the white people in town to be sold, itwould be brought to the black people because they were regarded,I don't know how to put this, but they were regarded as peoplewho do not have rights in the population of South Africa.

QUESTION:: Just explain to the Committee how you see thatburning the vehicle of a person cheating the people in an economicalsense can be defined, that he has done the burning of the vehicleas a political objective? What political objective do you thinkyou gain if you burn the vehicle of the milkman?

ANSWER:: Your Honour I think it has been on several occasionsthat we had mass actions to march to the magistrate's office intown so that we can get a solution for everything that was happening. I'm referring to the things that were happening or that weredone against the community of Masilo, but we never came to a conclusionbecause on many occasions that we've been to the magistrate butno solution at all, that is why we decided as the youth that wewill burn this car when it is coming into the township to bringthat kind of milk again.

QUESTION:: ...on 22 April 1993 you said this police officer,the deceased pointed his finger at you, could you just explainwhat happened further then?

ANSWER:: That's true, he pointed a finger at me and onhis other hand he had a long gun and said to me, you see you arealways at the forefront and it is not my first time to see youin wars and everytime when there is violence I see you among thepeople. Now this time I will never say I will arrest you orI will harass you, but the week will never go by before I couldkill you. That is what he said with his mouth, he used to eatwith....

CHAIRMAN:: Allow his evidence to be recorded please, willyou repeat that again, a week will not go by?

ANSWER:: I said when they arrived there he had this longgun in his other hand and with the other hand he pointed a fingerat me and he said to me I've seen you many times in the riotsand it's not the first time. Now this time I will not arrestyou or harass you, but I will kill you before the end of thisweek. That was on 22 April 1993, it was on a Wednesday at aboutpast 11 in the morning.

QUESTION:: ...the deceased again? (Start of question isoften lost due to lack of microphone).

ANSWER:: I met the deceased again at about past 12, thatis past 12 midnight, that is when I met him on that day. I didn'teven realise it was him, it was now on 23 April when I met him.

QUESTION:: Where did you meet him?

ANSWER:: I was passing next to a hall, a community hall,I was from my girlfriend's place, I passed next to a shebeen,I didn't go inside I only passed, I think he saw me passing. Now when I was very close to the hall I heard a voice from behind,the voice said "man stop". When I looked it was himwith a gun in his hand pointing at me and I stood, I asked himwhy do you want me to stop, what do you want from me when youpoint the gun to me like that? He said unacceptable words andI felt very regretful not to say these words, he said to me let'sgo to Paul's place and I asked him what are we going to do atPaul's place? He said don't ask me many things because he hadthis terrible thing in his hand, a gun, and because at that timeI was scared of death I listened to his orders and we went anywherewhere he wanted us to go to. When we approached Paul's area,the street in which Paul lived, it happened that he was far behindme, you know we were not walking close to each other, he was behindme. I thought that this person he wanted to detain me becausehe took me by force, I must say he took me by force because Inever thought that he wanted me to go to Paul's place. I washeading for my home to sleep. Now according to his orders Idid what he ordered me to do, it's because he had a gun in hishand, I was not armed I did not have a stone in my hand, nothingand he slapped me on the, in that same street because he was veryclose to me. I got angry and I disturbed and I was aggravatedand I got scared and I grabbed him, you know I just grabbed him. I don't have any authority to take anybody's life, God is theonly person who can take people's lives because he knows if hetakes a person's life, what is he doing with that. It wasn'tmy intention to battle with him until his gun was on my side andI shot him. I shot him three times.

QUESTION:: Can you just explain on which basis you saythat by killing this police officer you seek to further politicalobjectives?

ANSWER:: I can say this to the Committee, it wasn't myintention at all to kill him because I was trying to protect myself. In trying to protect myself against him he could have killedme actually if I didn't protect myself and I believe that it wouldnever appear before the court of law because he was working fora very corrupted government. I'm really sorry as I'm here beforethe Committee and before the community and to all the people thatI've acted against, his family.

QUESTION:: Were you at that time a member of any politicalorganisation?

ANSWER:: I was a member of the African National CongressYouth League.

QUESTION:: Do I understand you correctly to state thenthat you killed this police officer in self-defence, is that yourversion?

ANSWER:: Yes I believe it is true, that is what I said.

QUESTION:: I would still like you to just elaborate onthe matter of the political objective that you sought by doingso. Could you just elaborate on that please?

JUDGE WILSON:: He hasn't said he had one has he, he saidhe acted in self-defence.

QUESTION:: Could you just explain to the Committee howdo you see, because to make out a case here today you have toprove that there's a political objective involved in the killingof this police officer. Could you explain how you bring thisself-defence matter into line with a political objective, if thereis any?

ANSWER:: The main issue is that I was not intending tokill a person at that moment, it wasn't my intention but the deceasedwas against the community not for the first time but on many occasions,myself included. Everytime when we had mass actions, boycottingthe rent, organising stay-aways, you would find him together withother policemen against the community, assaulting small childrenand elderly people. They didn't care about anybody who getsinjured or doesn't get injured. My aim was not to kill I wasjust protecting myself.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR VAN DER MERWE

EXAMINATION BY MR MPSHE

QUESTION:: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Jackson would youagree with me if I say that the change that you wanted to bringabout by killing this policeman was to have pure, unpolluted milk?

ANSWER:: Can you please repeat your question sir, I donot understand?

QUESTION:: By killing this man was to have pure unpollutedmilk?

ANSWER:: No sir I didn't want change to come that wayyou know to get real milk, I want to tell this Committee one otherthing that it wasn't intentional to kill the deceased who wasa policeman, I was trying to protect myself because on many occasionsif you were active elsewhere in the struggle there would be manyways of, for the former South African Police to kidnap you andto kill you far away where your relatives would never know whereyou've been thrown.

QUESTION:: I want to refer to page 3 of your applicationform. You will remember you filled in an application form on11 June in Kroonstad, do you remember that application form?

ANSWER:: I remember it sir.

QUESTION:: I'm going to take out certain passages in theform, I'll read them out to you and if you don't remember pleaseindicate to me. First let us start by saying what appears onthe application form is it what you wrote yourself?

ANSWER:: No I didn't write this.

QUESTION:: Somebody wrote for you?

ANSWER:: Yes somebody wrote for me.

QUESTION:: Was this somebody who was writing being toldby yourself to write what appears on the document?

ANSWER:: Yes I explained to the person, I first explainedto the person before I could write and thereafter I requestedto go to the telephone because I wanted to call my parents andthen this person wrote and when I came back he was finished andI didn't take the forms to read, he just told me you know theywere fine and I took them and I put them into the locker and thenext day I put them into the post.

QUESTION:: I will read certain passages from the applicationform and if you feel this is not what you said you must indicateso that we don't pursue it any further. On page 3 of your applicationform under paragraph 9 (a)(iv) Mr Chairman and members of theCommittee, the last sentence I will quote that sentence. Itreads

"He was also known as ANC political opponent".

Do you remember you saying to your scribe that?

ANSWER:: I remember sir.

QUESTION:: What is it that the deceased did for you toarrive at a conclusion that he was ANC political opponent?

ANSWER:: As I've indicated from the beginning, I saidwhen we had mass actions complaining against the rent boycottsand organising stay-aways he was a person or they were the peoplewho assaulted the community in a very severe way, irrespectiveof whether it was a child or an elderly person.

QUESTION:: Would you agree with me if I say if he didas you state, he was simply carrying out one of his obligationsas a police officer and not that he was targeting the ANC at all?

ANSWER:: Sir I don't think he was fulfilling his obligations,everytime he would assault people who are innocent, people whodo not fight, who do not break or people who do not disrupt anyparty(?). He would assault people marching to lodge a complaint.

JUDGE WILSON:: The passage you put to him was that hewas also known as an ANC political opponent?

MR MPSHE:: Yes Mr Chairman, it is the last sentence.

JUDGE WILSON:: Shouldn't it then be correctly read "...andpresumably being SAP member he was also known as ANC politicalopponent"?

MR MPSHE:: Yes Mr Chairman, members of the Committee thatcan also be because it appears thereon. I stand indebted forthat.

QUESTION:: I want to move to paragraph 10 of your applicationform, 10(b), the second paragraph thereof. The sentence startsby saying

"...We then decided to remove him or do something so tohave that pressure relieved, to have access to fight for our birthright."

Did you hear that?

ANSWER:: Yes I heard sir.

QUESTION:: Who this "we" you are referring to?

ANSWER:: This is what was said by some of our commanderwho was known as Mac Maharaj, he was from Tanzania that was whenhe was trying to form the SDU branch and this was said, the decisionwas made upon this that was said by Mr Maharaj, which is thatthe deceased had to be killed or taken away from the communityso that the community....(other side of tape, final part of answerlost).

QUESTION:: I'll read the next sentence to you, you said

"It was just I met him alone but I can assure you everyonewas prepared to do it. The pressure was irresistible and thatwas the only option."

Did you hear that?

ANSWER:: No I can't remember that very well.

QUESTION:: If I heard you correctly in your answer tome earlier on, you stated that this commander from Tanzania, therewas a meeting and the discussions were not finalised, did yousay so?

ANSWER:: Yes I agree, I said that.

QUESTION:: What is it that was not finalised?

ANSWER:: A decision was not taken as to whether we killthis person or not, the meeting was adjourned on that day whenthis was said.

QUESTION:: I'm now moving to page 4 Mr Chairman, membersof the Committee of the application form, paragraph 11(a), asa follow-up on what you have just said now that no decision wastaken to remove or eliminate him, is the reason why on paragraph11(a) when asked as to whether the offence was committed in anexecution of an order or on behalf of for which the approval ofthe (indistinct) Liberation Movement, State Department or securityforce concerned, you answered by saying the following

"No there was no official order on behalf of ANC."

That is correct?

ANSWER:: Could you please repeat your question? He hasagain read it in English but I don't understand it very much.

QUESTION:: I'm still on paragraph 11(a). You have justsaid to the Committee that no decision was taken in that meetingas to the elimination of the deceased, do you remember that?

ANSWER:: Yes I remember that.

QUESTION:: Is it the reason why in answer to questionon paragraph 11(a) you said no there was no official order onbehalf of the ANC?

ANSWER:: Sir as I have explained earlier that this formor these forms I didn't fill them in on my own, I asked someoneand explained to that person that please fill in these forms forme because I was trusting that person and that is why I said tohim I want to go to phone my parents and I realised that I couldn'tdo away with going to the phone because the police at the prisonwould hold their own meetings, can you understand that, and thereforeI was in a hurry of not being limited by time, that is why I askedthat person to fill in the form for me.

QUESTION:: Paragraph 11(a) is not what you told him, isthat what you are saying?

ANSWER:: Yes I think it is not what I told him.

QUESTION:: At what stage did you shoot the deceased. What was the deceased doing at the time when you shot him thrice?

ANSWER:: I explained to the Committee that when I shotthe deceased three times he slapped me and I got frightened becauseI could see he had a gun on him and I saw on many a times whata gun can do to the people, especially when it was in the handsof the people like the police. I realised that if I could tryto run away he was going to kill me and that is why I say I wasvery scared and I got emotional and that's how I found myselfstruggling with him until the gun got into my hands. I justpressed and then he got shot.

QUESTION:: Mr Jackson I will repeat that question andhelp you by saying he slapped you, now after slapping you I understandyou to be saying you had the gun in your hand. When you startedshooting, what was he doing after the slapping?

ANSWER:: He tried to put the gun away from me and I gotto the trigger and I realised that I had shot him on the ribsand then I shot him for the second time and then lastly for thethird time and then I went away.

QUESTION:: When you shot at him he was still grapplingwith you am I correct, is that what you are saying?

ANSWER:: Yes it happened while we were struggling forthe gun.

QUESTION:: You were charged and brought before the Courtwhere you were convicted and the sentence was delivered on 3 November1993, do you remember that?

ANSWER:: Yes I can remember that.

QUESTION:: In that court you testified Mr Chairman andmembers of the Committee, I'm referring to the attached courtrecord where the magistrate was imposing sentence, page 8 thereof. Mr Chairman and members of the Committee I'm going to read fromline 6 of paragraph 1. In court Mr Jackson you said the following,this is the summation of the magistrate

"You stated that the deceased ran away and you shot athim three times in succession."

Do you hear that?

ANSWER:: Yes I can hear that.

QUESTION:: He was running away when you shot him?

ANSWER:: Yes that is what I said in the Supreme Courtbecause I was trying to protect myself because I didn't know maybeor the way I was heading to because I had killed a member of theSouth African Police Force, that is the old South African PoliceForce.

QUESTION:: You gave the Committee an impression that youwere never on good terms with the deceased because he once pointedwith a finger and he had a "haelgeweer" and he threatenedto shoot you, do you remember that?

ANSWER:: Yes I can remember well sir.

QUESTION:: On the record page 7 Mr Chairman and the Committeethe Court summed your evidence as you having said, paragraph 2,as you having said that, paragraph 3 thank you, second sentenceor line 2 thereof, he summed up as you having said that

"Yourself and the deceased were friends and you used tovisit together regularly."

Do you remember?

ANSWER:: Yes I can remember although I started by tellingthis Committee that I was told here that I must tell the truth,the whole truth, here I'm telling the truth but at the court whereI was, that is the Supreme Court, I was lying because I was tryingto protect myself. [Applause].

CHAIRMAN:: Why should you clap when a man says he waslying, please allow him to finish. Yes please carry on.

EXAMINATION BY MR MPSHE (contd)

MR MPSHE:: Were you also lying Mr Jackson when you said,still on the same paragraph Mr Chairman and members of the Committee,when you told the Court that there was never a problem betweenthe deceased and yourself before, were you also lying?

ANSWER:: Sir I said when I spoke here when I was at theSupreme Court giving evidence, I was trying to protect myselfbecause I thought I would get a lighter sentence because I didn'tknow what I was supposed to do because by then we had the operativegovernment, I didn't know what to do, I felt it was better tolie to the Court. Maybe this lies would help me to get out oftrouble.

QUESTION:: To save time could you just say yes I was lyingor no I wasn't lying because I'm still going to continue.

ANSWER:: I was lying.

QUESTION:: Then you were further lying to the Court whenyou said you and the deceased were at a tavern?

ANSWER:: Yes I admit that I was lying.

QUESTION:: Then you were further lying when you said tothe Court that the deceased insisted that you go with him to drinkfurther?

ANSWER:: Yes I do agree that I was telling the lies.

JUDGE WILSON:: In between there, there was also accordingto the judgment evidence given by Matsoso about a dispute betweenyou and the deceased in the tavern. Was Mr Matsoso also lyingon your behalf? Do you remember you gave evidence and you saidit wasn't Matsoso it was Teboho who intervened, do you rememberthat?

ANSWER:: May you please repeat your question sir?

QUESTION:: Matsoso had given evidence about trouble betweenyou and the deceased, do you remember that evidence, in the bar?

ANSWER:: Yes I remember that evidence.

QUESTION:: You explained that it wasn't Matsoso who intervenedbut one Teboho, do you remember telling the judge that?

ANSWER:: Yes I remember sir.

EXAMINATION BY MR MPSHE (contd)

QUESTION:: Mr Jackson what did you achieve politicallyby killing this man?

ANSWER:: Sir I won't say that there is anything I achievedby killing this person that is politically, but I think even ifit can happen that the community of Masilo complain about anythingregarding their rights, I don't think that there would be troubleamongst such people. I say this because I have killed the deceased.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MPSHE

MR VAN DER MERWE:: Thank you Mr Chairman we will not callany further witnesses in support of this application.

MR MPSHE:: Mr Chairman in respect of the next of kin tothe deceased I want to record as follows that the wife to thedeceased, a Mrs Dtsele(?) has been traced in Welkom, she has beeninformed of her rights and Mr Chairman the intention was to makeher be present when the matter is called and the overtime wasnot foreseen by myself. As a result thereof I was not in a positionto cause her to be here within an hour's time. I have her contacttelephone number at home in the event the Chairman or membersof the Committee would like her to be here tomorrow.

CHAIRMAN:: Have you not consulted with her yet?

MR MPSHE:: Mr Chairman I have not consulted with her,she was contacted by the investigators.

CHAIRMAN:: Yes.

MR MPSHE:: But she is available in Welkom.

CHAIRMAN:: Mr Mpshe I think in strict compliance withthe provisions of the Act and the fact that she may have claimsagainst the Reparations Committee and so on, it would be appropriatethat she be afforded an opportunity to be present.

MR MPSHE:: Thank you Mr Chairman then I would requestan adjournment for the day Mr Chairman, I will cause her to behere tomorrow morning.

CHAIRMAN:: Just before we adjourn, gentlemen can we resumeat 9 o'clock tomorrow?

MR MPSHE:: For me it is possible Mr Chairman.

CHAIRMAN:: I think that this is the kind of case wherethe facts are not particularly involved, we ought to be able todeal with your addresses immediately after the witnesses havefinished giving evidence. On that understanding we will adjournuntil 9 o'clock tomorrow. This inquiry for today comes to anend, we are now going to adjourn until 9 o'clock tomorrow morning.

COMMISSION ADJOURNS

TAPE 10 DAY 4 - MR SEGOPA'S EVIDENCE IS GIVEN IN SOTHO ANDNO INTERPRETER FOR THE FIRST HALF

J SEGOPA: No I wasn't asleep, I was just in the house,thank you.

MR MATSE: PE: You were at home and you had someone or somepeople screaming the words Inkatha?

J SEGOPA: Yes.

MR MATSEPE: What do you know Inkatha as?

J SEGOPA: Inkatha is an organisation that used to killpeople, I used to hear that over the radio that Inkatha is killingpeople and I was threatened to hear them, they were around bythen.

MR MATSEPE: What standard did you get to at school?

J SEGOPA: No I didn't attend school.

MR MATSE: PE: When you heard about this Inkatha organisationover the radio how - did you know whether Inkatha was a politicalorganisation or a Christian organisation or a football organisation?

J SEGOPA: I heard it was an organisation that foughtagainst other organisations.

MR MATSE: PE: You mean an organisation that thought ...(in-tervention)

J SEGOPA: No I mean they fought against political organisations.

MR MATSE: PE: Who did you hear they were fighting against?

J SEGOPA: They were fighting against the ANC. They werekilling the people who belonged to the ANC so that they can rulethem.

MR MATSE: PE: Now this organisation called National Partydid you know about?

MR SEGOPA: Do you mean the National Party?

MR MATSE: PE: Yes.

MR SEGOPA: Yes I know that organisation.

MR MATSE: PE: By then did you know who was the leader ofthis organisation? Who did you know as the leader of this organisation?

MR SEGOPA: No I didn't know who the leader of this organisationwas.

MR MATSE: PE: This National Party organisation how do youknow the people of the National Party, do you know what colourscheme they wear?

MR SEGOPA: Yes they were White people, and some of themwere black.

MR MATSE: PE: Now this Inkatha organisation, you alreadysaid you knew Inkatha as a political organisation what colourwould you say were Inkatha members?

MR SEGOPA: There were many people and their organisationalso had White people in it.

MR MATSE: PE: Before this incident happened there at Kaotlahong(?)in the area where you were staying were there any killings thatoccurred there?

MR SEGOPA: Yes there were some, that is of Black peoplewho were killed but no one knew what killed them. They were alwaysattacked.

MR MATSE: PE: When people talk about these attacks therein the area where you stayed what did they say was the cause oftheir killings or who were killing them?

MR SEGOPA: It was rumoured that it was the Inkatha peopleand the Russians, but I don't know to which organisation did theRussians belong.

MR MATSE: PE: Where did you hear this from or did you hearthis from the radio or from the people talking?

CHAIRMAN: He said it was rumoured.

MR MATSEPE: Mr Chairman I am trying to find out how hewould get the rumour, was it possibly via announcements made inthe radio or?

CHAIRMAN: Oh go ahead.

MR MATSE: PE: Did you hear this being said over the radioor were these things said in your community?

MR SEGOPA: These things were said in the community atKaotlahong.

MR MATSE: PE: Did you hear this over the radio?

MR SEGOPA: Yes I also heard it over the radio.

MR MATSE: PE: Were you listening to a radio?

MR SEGOPA: Yes I did.

CHAIRMAN: Did you hear over the radio that the Russianshad killed people?

MR SEGOPA: Yes.

MR MATSE: PE: Thank you Mr Chairman, sorry may I just interrupthere because the witness said "marashia"(?) and theinterpretation came to say Russians, I don't think the witnessmeans Russians, I think he means "marashia", and notRussians, there is a difference.

MR MATSE: PE: Thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRMAN: Will he be able to explain the difference Mr Matsepe?

MR MATSEPE: Yes I think he would be able to explain thedifference.

CHAIRMAN: Yes ask him please.

MR MATSEPE: Mr Segopa do you realise that when you talkabout "marashi" here a person might think that you arespeaking about people from Russia, do you know about that, thepeople who stay overseas?

MR SEGOPA: Yes.

MR MATSEPE: Do you know of the Russians who are overseasin Russia, do you know about that?

MR SEGOPA: Yes I've heard about that.

MR MATSEPE: Now please explain whether you are speakingabout those people or not.

MR SEGOPA: No "marasha" is a gang that wasoperating in the mines and it used to attack people, they calledthem "marashia".

MR MATSEPE: What membership are they and what languagedo they speak?

MR SEGOPA: They are mostly Sotho.

MR MATSEPE: So you say you heard about these over theradio and when people were speaking around?

MR SEGOPA: Yes I heard so.

MR MATSEPE: I am going back now, when you linked yourselfwith this incident what did you have in your mind when you didthis? What were you thinking you were trying to solve by then,or what were you doing?

MR SEGOPA: My aim was to do away with apartheid. I wantedus to live together with the Whites, I didn't want to have apartheidanymore.

MR MATSEPE: Now if you wanted to live together with theWhites a question may arise that these people who came to yourtownship, I mean these White people maybe to entertain themselves,why did you kill them?

MR SEGOPA: By then apartheid was reigning, that was in1990. The Whites did not like blacks at all, so when we saw themin the township we thought they belonged to the Inkatha so wedecided to do away with them.

MR MATSEPE: You see one thing I think is not clear inyour evidence is that why do you associate these people with Inkathabecause they are White people, because you explained earlier thatInkatha had Black members.

MR SEGOPA: Yes Inkatha had Black members and White membersand we heard over the radio that these Whites who belonged toInkatha used to smear themselves with a black substance and thengo and attack people in places like Sebokeng.

MR MATSEPE: Do you mean Sebokeng?

MR SEGOPA: Yes Sebokeng and places like Johannesburg. Yes I heard this over the radio.

MR MATSEPE: What did you hear over the radio regardingthese White people who are smearing themselves with a black substance?

MR SEGOPA: They smeared black substance on their facesand they attacked Black people after doing so.

MR MATSEPE: Did you hear this over the radio?

MR SEGOPA: Yes.

MR MATSEPE: Were these White people you saw, did theyhave black substance on their faces?

MR SEGOPA: No.

MR MATSEPE: So why did you associate them with Inkatha?

MR SEGOPA: I thought they also were some of the Inkathamembers or their supporters.

MR MATSEPE: Do you understand that this is a bad incidentthat happened which you committed on that day?

MR SEGOPA: Yes I do.

MR MATSEPE: What can you tell the deceased's family regardingthis, that act that you committed?

MR SEGOPA: I would like the deceased's family to forgiveme and the community also to forgive me regarding this act thatI committed during that political time in 1990.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MATSEPE

QUESTION: Mr Segopa when this incident happened whattime was it?

MR SEGOPA: It was about six o'clock in the afternoon1990, September on Saturday.

QUESTION: Was it not at about 8 p.m?

MR SEGOPA: It was already sunset by then, around aboutsix o'clock in the afternoon.

QUESTION: Had Inkatha previously attacked your area?

MR SEGOPA: There were already ...(indistinct) who werekilled by then but I heard rumours that Inkatha would be comingto our community.

QUESTION: How many times, if you know did Inkatha attackyour area?

MR SEGOPA: They had never been to our community at all.

QUESTION: So Inkatha has never attacked your area before?

MR SEGOPA: That is so.

QUESTION: Were you at a meeting which was at the stadiumaddressed by Mr Minong(?)?

MR SEGOPA: Yes I was present.

QUESTION: What precisely did Mr Minong say?

MR SEGOPA: Mr Minong did brief the residents of Kaotlahongand he said he heard that Inkatha would be coming to attack theresidents.

QUESTION: If I understand you well Mr Minong's addresswas to the effect that the residents must be prepared to protectthemselves, that is all what he said.

MR SEGOPA: That's what he said to protect ourselves withwhatever we had.

QUESTION: Did Mr Minong sanction or order any killingof people entering the area?

MR SEGOPA: Mr Minong said that Inkatha members wouldcome and attack us and then we must be prepared to defend ourselveswhen they arrive.

QUESTION: Did he tell the specific day or date or timewhen Inkatha would attack your area?

MR SEGOPA: He never mentioned the date but he said wemust be prepared and armed at all times.

QUESTION: Now how long after Mr Minong's address to thecommunity did this crime take place?

MR SEGOPA: It was well after some days after he has mentionedthat Inkatha would arrive in our community. On Saturday it happenedthat these white people came and then we attacked them as we thoughtthey were Inkatha members.

QUESTION: How many days after?

MR SEGOPA: It was after about four days after Mr Minonghad already delivered a speech to the community.

QUESTION: Now at the scene did any one of you, includingyourselves, talk to the occupants of the car to ascertain as towhether they were indeed Inkatha members?

MR SEGOPA: There were others who asked them whether arethey Inkatha members or not, specifically Tami Thlobo(?) did so,asked them are you Inkatha members, but Tami Thlobo said you areInkatha members.

QUESTION: So they were asked and they denied to be membersof Inkatha but they were told that they were by yourselves?

MR SEGOPA: That's so.

QUESTION: Are you a member of any force for protectionpurposes in the area?

MR SEGOPA: I am not a member of any security force inthe area where I stay.

QUESTION: Or do you have a unit like the SDU's in yourarea?

MR SEGOPA: We do have marshalls who manage to brief uson everything that occurred.

QUESTION: Do you know what SDU's means, self-defenceunits, do you have them in that area? Marshalls are people whomake sure that there is order when there are meetings, politicalmeetings or when there are marches, not so?

MR SEGOPA: Yes.

QUESTION: Now I am talking about self-defence units establishedin the area.

MR SEGOPA: Yes. There are many of these self-defenceunits where I stay.

QUESTION: And you are not a member thereof?

MR SEGOPA: Yes I was one of the public protectors orself-defence unit members.

QUESTION: You are not a member of the SDU's? What doyou mean by "a", you were or you're not?

MR SEGOPA: No I am not a member of the self-defence unit.

QUESTION: Are you a member of any political organisation?

MR SEGOPA: I am a member of the ANC.

QUESTION: Since when were you a member thereof?

MR SEGOPA: Since 1990, approximately in May, I am notsure as to the date or the month.

QUESTION: And who is the leader of the local ANC?

MR SEGOPA: It is Veks Mayekiso and Mr Minong.

QUESTION: What is Mr Minong's position in the local ANC?

MR SEGOPA: He was an official who looked after the communitiesseeing whether the community is not harassed or not.

QUESTION: Mr Segopa in an organisation or a movementthere are office bearers like a chairperson, vice chairperson,secretary, treasurer, organiser, convenor and so on, now I wantto know which position did Mr Minong occupy in the ANC?

MR SEGOPA: He was the secretary of the local branch.

QUESTION: Mr Segopa you testified that in doing whatyou have done you wanted to stop apartheid and you wanted Blackand White to live together, do you remember that?

MR SEGOPA: Yes I do remember that.

QUESTION: Now these people that you killed did they notthen at the time form part of the Whites whom you wanted to livewith Blacks?

MR SEGOPA: I could not appreciate that we would livewith White people bearing in mind the conditions in which we lived...(tape10A ends)

QUESTION: Now what did you aim to achieve by killingthese people?

MR SEGOPA: I wanted to bring equality among the Blackpeople and among the White people here in South Africa, the wholecountry as a whole, as it is.

QUESTION: But how would they be equal with you if youkilled them?

MR SEGOPA: This was just an indication to the then governmentthat the apartheid was not good between Blacks and Whites, Blacksand Whites must just be one and the same.

QUESTION: In your answer will I be correct if I say youmean to be saying that when you killed these Whites you were killingapartheid? You saw them as apartheid?

MR SEGOPA: Yes I would agree with you, it was apartheid.

JUDGE WILSON: Do you know Mr Mosese(?) who gave evidenceat your trial?

MR SEGOPA: I do not know him.

JUDGE WILSON: Who said he took a sjambok from some man,one of the accused, do you remember that witness?

MR SEGOPA: I do remember Michael Maleme(?)

JUDGE WILSON: Did he say he took a sjambok from you?

MR SEGOPA: Yes he did take the sjambok from me.

JUDGE WILSON: Were you accused no.13?

MR SEGOPA: Yes.

JUDGE WILSON: And he took the sjambok to try to defendthe four people who were sitting in the car, do you remember thatevidence?

MR SEGOPA: Yes I do remember that court evidence.

JUDGE WILSON: And the car was set on fire while the fourpeople were still sitting inside it, do you remember that evidence,you were standing at the front of the car at the time?

MR SEGOPA: No I was on the side of the car.

JUDGE WILSON: I am reading from the Appellate Divisionjudgment. And he tried to open the car doors to let the peopleget out of the burning car, do you remember that evidence?

MR SEGOPA: The evidence provided was incorrect. He wasnot telling the truth because he was someone who was bought tocome and oppress some of the witnesses like I was withdrawn fromthe court case so as to come and oppress some of my fellow accused. I was withdrawn from the case for some time. Afterwards thepolice came to me to come and lead evidence against some of thefellow accused. Because if I could not do that they would drivethe case against me.

JUDGE WILSON: And you've told us that after you lit thecar it took two minutes to kill all four of them, do you remembertelling us that?

MR SEGOPA: Yes that's so, it is correct.

JUDGE WILSON: What happened to the white woman?

MR SEGOPA: She was killed also.

JUDGE WILSON: And before she was killed?

MR SEGOPA: They were standing with her, a group was nextto her I could not see what was happening next to her becauseeverybody was just around her. She was surrounded, that's whatI am saying.

JUDGE WILSON: And they chopped her with axes.

MR SEGOPA: They did chop her with axes and they stabbedher with pangas.

JUDGE WILSON: And stabbed her in both her eyes, thisevidence was given at the trial wasn't it?

MR SEGOPA: It is true they did stab her but I cannotreally tell whether they did stab her in the eyes but she wasbadly stabbed.

JUDGE WILSON: So it wasn't all as quick as you said itwas, was it?

MR SEGOPA: I did not have a watch but it's somethingthat took a short space of time.

JUDGE WILSON: Do you remember also that Mr Simon Minonggave evidence at the trial?

MR SEGOPA: Yes I do remember.

JUDGE WILSON: He said he was the chairman of the localbranch of the ANC, do you remember that?

MR SEGOPA: Yes I do remember.

JUDGE WILSON: And in his evidence which was given inmitigation of sentence he said there was tension on the Fridaynight because there was a dispute between two rival taxi associations,do you remember that?

MR SEGOPA: Yes I do remember that.

JUDGE WILSON: He made no mention of Inkatha in his evidencedid he?

MR SEGOPA: I do not clearly remember, but he did mentionto the residents what was about to happen.

JUDGE WILSON: I am talking about the evidence he gaveat the trial where you appeared, do you remember him saying that,he was led in mitigation?

MR SEGOPA: He spoke in English and then I could not understandwhat he said, what he explained at that time.

JUDGE WILSON: Do you remember that Mr Minong was calledas a witness by Mr Naidoo who had appeared for the accused?

MR SEGOPA: Yes I do remember.

JUDGE WILSON: He applied for special leave to call MrMinong. And the evidence he gave was about this taxi dispute,do you remember that?

MR SEGOPA: I am not clear as to the facts on that point.

CHAIRMAN: Wasn't Mr Minong called in order to assistthe defence on the question of sentence, he was called to putforward evidence before the Court that might assist the Courton passing a lenient sentence, isn't it the reason why he wascalled?

MR SEGOPA: Was he called to give evidence on behalf ofthe defence or what, I don't understand the question quite clearly?

CHAIRMAN: After you had been found guilty he was calledon behalf of the people who had been found guilty, before theJudge could pass sentence on them.

MR SEGOPA: Yes he was called.

CHAIRMAN: And the purpose for him being called was, asI have just said, isn't it so?

MR SEGOPA: You are right, he was called.

ADV DE JAGER: Did you realise that there was also Whitepersons in the ANC, members of the ANC?

MR SEGOPA: No by that time I didn't know that there wereWhite members in the ANC.

ADV DE JAGER: You haven't heard of Mr Joe Slovo for instance?

MR SEGOPA: Yes I know about him that he was one of theANC members.

ADV DE JAGER: And he was a White person.

MR SEGOPA: Yes I know that he was White.

ADV DE JAGER: So you knew there were also White persons,members of the ANC?

MR SEGOPA: Yes I knew about Joe Slovo.

ADV DE JAGER: And did this woman, the deceased, did sheplead for her life?

MR SEGOPA: No I never got near to her.

ADV DE JAGER: At the trial there was evidence that shepleaded and even offered money and asked the people to save herlife, did you hear the evidence?

MR SEGOPA: No I never got near to that woman. I onlygot to the first man who I pulled out of the car.

ADV DE JAGER: No I don't say you were near her but atthe trial, you were at the trial and there was evidence that shepleaded for her life and that one of your co-accused said he wantedto have intercourse with her and that they dragged her away fromthe car to behind a house and when she returned she was againassaulted and at one stage her eyes were stabbed and at a latterstage her breast was cut off.

MR SEGOPA: No that evidence was not true, it was givenby people who were bought to say so. I even want to believe thatthose people were not there when this incident occurred.

ADV DE JAGER: Was there any medical evidence at the trial,a doctor giving evidence?

MR SEGOPA: Yes there was.

ADV DE JAGER: Did he give evidence about the injuriessustained by the people?

MR SEGOPA: Yes this doctor explained that they had beenstabbed with knives and that they were hit by sjamboks.

ADV DE JAGER: Weren't you on a truck with accused 2 and3 following this car?

MR SEGOPA: When this car, this other car arrived, thesepeople had already been killed and this car also had some peoplein it.

ADV DE JAGER: So you were not on the truck followingthe people?

MR SEGOPA: No.

ADV DE JAGER: But you heard the evidence at the trialthat they said you followed the people and you jumped from a truckwith other people?

MR SEGOPA: Yes I heard that but it wasn't true becausepeople who were giving evidence they were lying. They were nottelling the truth.

JUDGE WILSON: Did you give evidence to contradict this?

MR SEGOPA: No they never gave me a chance to give evidence.

CHAIRMAN: Are there any questions in re-examination?

RE-EXAMINATION BY MR MATSEPE: Thank you Mr Chairman justtwo aspects. You have just been asked about or told about injuries,very serious injuries that the woman who was killed sustained,her breasts being hacked and so on, and allegations that a personor submissions that a person, evidence was led to the effect thatsomebody took her behind a car and wanted to have sexual relationswith her. Now at the time when this incident was taking placecan you give us an indication of how many people were present,approximately?

MR SEGOPA: The people who were there were about 500 ormore than that. There were many people around there.

MR MATSEPE: You had indicated to the Court that you hadnever gone to school, can you count?

MR SEGOPA: Yes I didn't go to school but I can countand I can also read Sotho.

MR MATSEPE: If you look at the people in this hall doyou say the people who were present on that day were they morethan the number of people in the hall today or less?

MR SEGOPA: The people in the hall are less than thosewho were present when this incident occurred.

MR MATSEPE: You were also asked about counsel for thecommittee about your membership of the SDU's and you indicatedthat you were a marshall, what was the, according to your knowledge,the work that marshalls had to do in the area where you lived,according to your knowledge?

MR SEGOPA: I was not a marshall, I was a member. Themarshalls they used to safeguard the halls when there were meetings.

MR MATSEPE: In your neighbourhood what would they dothe marshalls?

MR SEGOPA: They would move around the township patrollingand ensuring that no people are being attacked.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MATSEPE

CHAIRMAN: Very well you are excused. You can go down.

WITNESS EXCUSED

MR MATSEPE: Mr Chairman I am going to need a little bitof guidance here. My intention is to call a witness on behalfof Mr Segopa but this witness was also an applicant and I intendto withdraw his application and remove it from the roll. I don'tknow whether I should withdraw the application before and thencall him as a witness. In other words I don't want to close theapplication for Mr Segopa at this stage but I still have to withdrawthe applicant. Which one to do first, that's the direction Ineed?

ADV DE JAGER: Did the other applicant instruct you towithdraw his application?

MR MATSEPE: Yes Sir. Sorry do you understand the differencebetween removing it from the roll and withdrawing it, becausethere's a difference? If we withdraw the application it meansthat he can never be set down he will have to re-apply. Mr ChairmanI would like to remove, my instructions are to have that applicationremoved from the roll, they are specific about that.

JUDGE WILSON: Is the application properly before us havingregard to the Act?

MR MATSEPE: Mr Chairman I don't believe the applicationis properly before this Committee in terms of the Act. That wouldbe then my request Mr Chairman to have it removed from the roll.

CHAIRMAN: What is the number of that case?

MR MPSHE: Mr Chairman and members of the court meetingthe application referred to by my learned friend is that one ofMokabe(?) no.G. It will not have our case number as I had indicatedin chambers that this is the application which was delivered tome at the hotel this week.

CHAIRMAN: Yes thank you.

MR MATSEPE: Mr Chairman I just want to indicate thatthere will come a stage when I will just ask for a short recessin order that I must make certain intimations to you regardingthe problem I am having with Mr Dhlamini before I finally act. But for purposes of now I then wish to call Mr Mokabe to giveevidence to the committee in the application of Segopa, and Iwould then request he be called.

CHAIRMAN: He's not giving evidence on his own behalf?

MR MATSEPE: He's not giving evidence on his own behalfSir.

CHAIRMAN: Very well you may call him.

MR MATSEPE: Thank you Sir.

MONARE JEREMIAH MOKABE: (sworn states)

EXAMINATION BY MR MATSEPE: Mr Mokabe I am going to askyou questions in Sesotho but I would like you to be brief in youranswers and in trying to do so I will indicate to you what evidenceI would like you to give. The person who has made his application,that is Segopa was he the co-accused with you in this case wherehe was found guilty, is that true?

MR MOKABE: Yes that's true.

MR MATSEPE: You were also found guilty in this case?

MR MOKABE: Yes.

MR MATSEPE: Now I am not going to ask you questions aboutwhether you were there on the date of this incident or not.

MR MOKABE: Yes.

MR MATSEPE: I want your evidence to show that, or toshow how the political climate at Kaotlahong by that time, doyou understand that?

MR MOKABE: Yes.

MR MATSEPE: Before giving such evidence I want you totell us whether you were relating yourself to a certain politicalorganisation, if so you must tell us what organisation is thatorganisation and what was your position in that organisation. You may continue Sir. Let me start here. Were you staying atKaotlahong by that time?

MR MOKABE: Yes.

MR MATSEPE: Were you in any political organisation?

MR MOKABE: Yes the ANC.

MR MATSEPE: What was your position in this ANC organisation?

MR MOKABE: I was a marshall.

MR MATSEPE: Can you repeat?

MR MOKABE: I was a marshall.

MR MATSEPE: Were you a marshall?

MR MOKABE: Yes.

MR MATSEPE: When this happened there at Kaotlahong whowas the ANC chairman by then?

MR MOKABE: It was Comrade Vex Mayekiso.

MR MATSEPE: Do you know Mr Minong?

MR MOKABE: Yes.

MR MATSEPE: What was Mr Minong's position in the ANCKaotlahong branch?

MR MOKABE: He was the secretary to Mr Vex Mayekiso.

MR MATSEPE: Thank you. Now this incident happened ofwhich we heard the evidence, and we know about it all. Now Iwould like you to shortly tell us what was the marshalls' functionduring those days when this incident happened, what was theirfunction?

MR MOKABE: As I have already explained that my role inthe ANC was as a marshall. Our function or our duty there at Kaotlahongin Odendaalsrus which is where I stay and where my parents staywho used to monitor the situation and peace when we had marchesas the Kaotlahong. That is when we were marching to the officesof our leaders with the objectives of telling them our complaintsas the Odendaalsrus residents.

MR MATSEPE: Let me ask you this way, were there any uprisingsat Kaotlahong by that time?

MR MOKABE: Do you mean during those days, yes there wereuprisings.

MR MATSEPE: Can you please explain to us what the uprisingswere all about?

MR MOKABE: There were rumours that the "marashi"were coming to Kaotlahong or Inkatha is coming to attack, Inkathais coming to attack the comrades. All the residents of Kaotlahong,especially those who stayed at Mushingoville(?) because they forcefullysettled there at Kaotlahong.

MR MATSEPE: Do you have any residents of Mushingovilleat Kaotlahong who were killed at that time according to your knowledge?

MR MOKABE: No, not according to my knowledge.

MR MATSEPE: Now Mr Segopa in his plea he explained thathe thought that these people who were killed belonged to Inkatha?

MR MOKABE: Yes.

MR MATSEPE: Do you know Inkatha members to be mostlyWhite members or Black members?

MR MOKABE: Inkatha members used to have relationshipswith White and they were working together with them. Yes it istrue they were harassing the Kaotlahong community.

MR MATSEPE: Were there any Inkatha people who attacked,who harassed people?

MR MOKABE: This happened on many occasions when we werecomplaining about some things as residents and (tape 10B ends)...

Plans, that is our plans as Kaotlahong residents so that theycannot achieve what they want to achieve.

MR MATSEPE: How did they disturb you or what act didthey take to disturb you?

MR MOKABE: They used to intimidate and threaten people,that is the residents of Kaotlahong.

MR MATSEPE: What did they do actually to threaten thesepeople?

MR MOKABE: They threatened them by saying that they wouldattack them so that they cannot achieve their objectives.

MR MATSEPE: Please you are confusing Mr Mokabe. Everytime when he tries to say something you start laughing and youmake such a noise and by so doing you confuse him and maybe youcause him not to remember what he was about to say. Thank youMr Chairman. Mr Mokabe please we want to understand what yourevidence is all about, just concentrate on what you are saying.

MR MOKABE: Yes Sir I will do so.

MR MATSEPE: I am trying to find from you, or let me sayyou mean these people verbally threatened the residents?

MR MOKABE: Yes.

MR MATSEPE: Weren't there any acts that they were committing?

MR MOKABE: No.

MR MATSEPE: Four people were killed on that day, nowthe applicant here, I mean Mr Segopa said to us he thought orsomeone said these people belonged to Inkatha that is why he tookpart in those killings. Now my question to you is because thesepeople were White what can you say regarding that Mr Segopa couldhave thought that these people belonged to Inkatha, what can yousay about that?

MR MOKABE: When one looks at the political climate thatprevailed during the 1990's or in 1990 Mr Segopa had to be frightenedbecause there were still threats that the "marashia"Inkatha will attack the residents, and I believed that, that theKaotlahong residents at that time were living under fear, theywere living with fear regarding those threats.

MR MATSEPE: Regarding those threats that had been madeagainst them.

MR MOKABE: Thank you Sir.

MR MATSEPE: Now I want to know were you living with herat that time?

MR MOKABE: Yes because I was a resident of Kaotlahong. I also lived with her because I didn't know what kind of peoplewere Inkatha people especially when they were on the rampage.

MR MATSEPE: How did you think Inkatha was, or what kindof an organisation did you think Inkatha was regarding the rumours?

MR MOKABE: According to my knowledge, in fact we didn'tknow what kind of people were Inkatha people. Let me explainin this way, we never had an Inkatha branch at Kaotlahong andthat is why the residents of Kaotlahong did not know a thing aboutInkatha and that is why they didn't know what kind of people wereInkatha people. We only used to hear about Inkatha.

MR MATSEPE: I want to know whether these rumours couldmake it known to you whether Inkatha was a political organisationor a football organisation, I don't want to put words into yourmouth, please explain to the Committee.

MR MOKABE: It was rumoured that they were killers whowould murder people wherever they go and they would brutally doso.

MR MATSEPE: Where did you hear these rumours?

MR MOKABE: We heard the rumours at Kaotlahong becausethere was another rumour of which I don't have the evidence andthe rumour was that the Inkatha and "marashia" ...(intervention)

MR MATSEPE: Did you hear about Inkatha on the radio?

MR MOKABE: Yes Sir.

MR MATSEPE: Did you hear about Inkatha from the newspapers?

MR MOKABE: Yes.

JUDGE WILSON: What was the other rumour you said you heardabout Inkatha and "marashia"?

MR MOKABE: The rumour - may you please repeat your question?

JUDGE WILSON: You said you heard a rumour about Inkathaand "marasha" I asked you what the rumour was?

MR MOKABE: No I didn't hear a rumour about Inkatha or"marashia". I would like to explain in the followingway. There was a rumour of which I don't have any evidence orI don't know who told people about such rumours that the "marashia"or Inkatha are going to attack. That is they are going to attackthe Kaotlahong residents.

MR MATSEPE: Mr Mokabe I would like you to listen attentivelynow because this question has to be clarified. I am not talkingabout the rumour that there is going to be an attack at Kaotlahong,I'm not talking about the rumour, I am talking about this groupcalled Inkatha. I want to know what kind of organisation didyou know Inkatha as? You said they were an organisation thatused to attack people?

MR MOKABE: Yes I said so.

MR MATSEPE: Now who gave you the knowledge that Inkathais an attacking organisation, that is my question?

MR MOKABE: I heard this over the radio, on the news andI heard this once more from the newspapers because I can reada newspaper.

MR MATSEPE: Did people talk about Inkatha in your township?

MR MOKABE: Yes people used to talk about Inkatha in thetownship.

MR MATSEPE: Did they say Inkatha was a good organisation?

MR MOKABE: No, they used to say many people hated theInkatha organisation.

MR MATSEPE: Is there any organisation or meeting whereMr Minong briefed any people, you, about an incident concerningInkatha? Were you there at such a meeting?

MR MOKABE: No I was not there at such a meeting.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MOKABE

CHAIRMAN: Yes Mr Mpshe.

QUESTIONS BY MR MPSHE: Mr Mokabe did the ANC acknowledgethe killing of people in your area?

MR MOKABE: No it did not.

MR MPSHE: What is referred to as Inkatha, have you everseen it?

MR MOKABE: During that time in 1990 I have not seen suchthing.

MR MPSHE: You just hear people talking about Inkathaof which you do not know about? On the day of this incidenthave you seen Inkatha by then?

MR MOKABE: No I haven't.

MR MPSHE: On the day of these murders or before thenwere you attacked by Inkatha in your community?

MR MOKABE: No Sir.

MR MPSHE: Before the day of the incident were you attackedby the "marashia" in your community?

MR MOKABE: No Sir.

MR MPSHE: This murder incident at what time would yousay it occurred if you still remember?

MR MOKABE: I do not know what time it occurred, I didn'thave a watch by then.

MR MPSHE: If you could remember was it around about sixo'clock in the afternoon or what time would you say it occurred?

MR MOKABE: No I do not have a vivid knowledge of that.

MR MPSHE: As you are the member of the ANC as a marshallwhat we would call a self-defence unit do you know that?

MR MOKABE: Yes I do know that.

MR MPSHE: Did you have a SDU in your community?

MR MOKABE: Yes Sir.

MR MPSHE: The applicant who just gave evidence JusticeSegopa do you know him very well?

MR MOKABE: No Sir.

MR MPSHE: As a marshall also being a member of the ANCI think that the most members of the ANC within your communityyou are known to them, or you know them, Mr Justice Segopa haveyou ever seen him in any or at any of your meetings, was he amember of the ANC?

MR MOKABE: I will explain in this manner about Justice. Justice is one person who was interested in politics but havinginterest in politics I did not have much knowledge about Justicewhether he was a member or not but I found him very active. Sometimeshe would help where necessary.

MR MPSHE: So to say that Mr Justice was active what didyou see him doing?

MR MOKABE: I saw him attending meetings that we heldin most times.

MR MPSHE: So being at the meetings does it tell thathe was active within the ANC, is that what you are saying?

MR MOKABE: That is how I perceive the matter, that heattends most meetings and then I can say that this person is interestedin what we are doing here.

MR MPSHE: Mr Mokabe would you agree with me when I saythat Justice Segopa attended your ANC meetings to listen justlike any other person?

MR MOKABE: Yes I agree with you.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MPSHE

QUESTIONS BY JUDGE MGOEPE: Now Mr Mokabe I understoodyou to say that you were not present at a meeting during whichMr Minong told people that Inkatha was about to attack the residents?

MR MOKABE: Yes that is so.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Did you ever hear that there was such ameeting where he said that, even though you did not attend personally?

MR MOKABE: No.

JUDGE WILSON: There is just one point I would like toexplore, you were asked about what time this incident took placeand you said you didn't have a watch, do you remember tellingus that?

MR MOKABE: Yes I remember saying that.

JUDGE WILSON: Does this mean that you were there whenthe incident took place but you just don't know what time it was?

MR MOKABE: No I was not there.

JUDGE WILSON: So you weren't there at all so you don'tknow about it, is that so?

MR MOKABE: Yes Sir.

JUDGE WILSON: Thank you.

ADV DE JAGER: Did Mr Minong give evidence at your trial?

MR MOKABE: Yes.

ADV DE JAGER: And did he say at the time there was troublebetween two taxi groups?

MR MOKABE: Yes that is true.

ADV DE JAGER: And that the people feared an attack frommembers of one of the taxi groups?

MR MOKABE: Yes that is true.

ADV DE JAGER: And was that the position at the time ofthe attack, round about? Did he speak the truth or not?

MR MOKABE: He did speak the truth, those were the conditionsat that time.

ADV DE JAGER: So he said nothing about the involvementof Inkatha at all, he said it was rivalry between two taxi groups?

MR MOKABE: He did speak about those incidents.

ADV DE JAGER: Yes but I put it to you that accordingto the information before us in the papers that he spoke of rivalrybetween two taxi groups but he didn't mention Inkatha.

MR MOKABE: What I remember clearly is that he did speakabout "marashia" in his evidence and also about Inkatha,he did speak about Inkatha when he gave evidence before the courtin Virginia.

ADV DE JAGER: And do you remember what they said aboutyou in court, that they in fact said that you stabbed the ladyin both eyes and that she was crying?

MR MOKABE: Yes I do remember.

ADV DE JAGER: And you did not deny that, you didn't giveevidence at all in the trial.

MR MOKABE: What I remember vividly is that I refusedand said I know nothing about the incident that occurred in Odendaalsruswhich is Kaotlahong where I reside.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR DE JAGER

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MATSEPE

CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much you are excused.

WITNESS EXCUSED

MR MATSEPE: Thank you Mr Chairman that closes the casefor the applicant Segopa

CASE FOR APPLICANT MR SEGOPA

MR MATSEPE: I have indicated earlier that I just wanteda last final consultation which will not last long with the otherapplicant just to set my mind at ease. Maybe we might have toapproach you in chambers regarding the problem I am facing withthe next applicant.

CHAIRMAN: Well will you try and expedite matters as quicklyas you can.

MR MATSEPE: Mr Chairman I will certainly do that.

CHAIRMAN: Alright. We will take a short adjournment.

COMMISSION ADJOURNS

COMMISSION RESUMES

CHAIRMAN: Which applicant are you talking about?

MR MATSEPE: I am talking about Justice Segopa the oneI am presently with. I Have the intention actually Mr Chairmanto make a substantially motivated submission to the Committeeand in the light of the fact that I haven't been able to preparethat submission my request therefore to you would be to grantme your indulgence and also give me time to prepare written submissionswhich would be submitted together with the other applicants thatI represented during the course of the week. And which submissionsI confirm would be made available to the Committee within twoweeks hereof.

MR MPSHE: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman I had indicatedto my colleague that I am ready to address the Committee on thisparticular application. But I would leave the application, hisapplication to the discretion of the Committee Mr Chairman andI would follow whatever is decided upon. Mr Chairman before theChair decides on the application by my learned friend Mr Chairmanthe Committee would note that I did not call any witness in theform of victim or next of kin to the victims in Justice Segopa'sapplication. I did not do so because these are not available. I have caused to be placed before all members a document whichis a report from the investigating unit in Durban and I referyou Mr Chairman and the honourable members of the Committee particularlyto page 10 thereof up till the end of the document wherein thereport about the next of kin in this application is well laidout. Thank you Mr Chairman.

ADV DE JAGER: Do you tender this as evidence, this report?

MR MPSHE: I don't hand it in as evidence but I hand itin to support my explanation as to the reason why the next ofkin are not here, because this is a report submitted to me bythe investigating unit as to what they have done.

ADV DE JAGER: Ja. The only reason I am asking is becauseI think we should, if it's tendered as evidence it should be givento the attorney or to the representatives so that they could haveit before them and if they want to counter anything they shouldbe able to do so. But if it's only as far as victims are concerned,and not tendered as evidence I think it could go in, I don't know.

CHAIRMAN: We will receive it as an explanation as to whythe next of kin are not present.

MR MPSHE: Thank you Mr Chairman. And further Mr Chairmanif I may add I refer the Chair and the honourable committee membersto page 10 thereof it starts from page 1 and that document givesthe names of all the next of kin to the victims in all applicationsthat were handled today. Now this is in compliance with the requestby the committee member Advocate de Jager yesterday that namesof next of kin should be supplied. This document covers all thatis required. Thank you.

CHAIRMAN: Thank you Mr Mpshe. Now as for your argumentthat should be addressed now by Mr Matsepe you say that you requiretime. The facts are very, very simple in this matter Mr Matsepe. Most of it is common cause. Do you still require time to addressus? I know you mentioned something about ...(indistinct) individuationcan hardly be advanced in the case where the accused did not giveevidence.

MR MATSEPE: Mr Chairman that is precisely what I wouldhave like to research. That accompanied by the fact that in today'sapplication we actually heard that the applicant was having theimpression wrongfully or rightfully that the victims were membersof Inkatha, and the criteria for judging his actions should thatcriteria be a subjective or an objective one? I am of the viewthat I might come up with some authority that would support thesubmission that I want to make to the Committee.

CHAIRMAN: Mr Matsepe the Committee is appreciative ofthe fact that you stepped into this case at a very late stageand may not have had enough time to consider certain legal aspectsthat might arise. That being so we are agreeable to afford youan opportunity to hand in your written argument at a later stage,but I think we should fix a time. You say that it should be afortnight from today?

MR MATSEPE: Yes Sir.

CHAIRMAN: What date is that Mr Matsepe?

MR MATSEPE: The 9th of August, that is the - Mr Chairmancould we make it the 12th of August in the light of the fact thatthe Friday is a holiday?

CHAIRMAN: Very well. This matter will now be finalisedin as far as the hearing of evidence and argument is concerneduntil after we have considered a written argument from Mr Matsepeand Mr Mpshe, and these have to be handed in by not later thanthe 12th of August 1996.

MR MATSEPE: I thank you Mr Chairman.

CHAIRMAN: Mr Mpshe would you make arrangements aboutadequate to enable you to (tape 11A ends)...his argument in sufficienttime to enable you to respond to it?

MR MPSHE: Yes Mr Chairman that will be done with him,I will arrange that with him.

CHAIRMAN: Yes, very well. As far as both of you are concernedwe take it that your written submissions will be made availableto us by the 12th of August. Thank you very much.

MR MATSEPE: Mr Chairman may I take this opportunity tothank the Commission, the Committee for hearing me and I wishto be excused now because it appears that this is the last ofthe applicants I shall be representing.

CHAIRMAN: You are excused. I thank you for your assistanceMr Matsepe.

MR MATSEPE: Thank you.

MR MPSHE: Mr Chairman at this point in time I refer theChair and the honourable members of the Committee back to matterno. H that of David Tamsanga Jackson, number H in our bundle andI will then call the wife to the deceased in the matter to thewitness stand Mr Chairman. Her name is Mamokete, M-A-M-O-K-E-T-E,Vivien Dithebe, D-I-T-H-E-B-E.

VIVIEN DITHEBE MAMOKETE: (sworn states)

EXAMINATION BY MR MPSHE: May I determine Mrs Dithebeyour husband the deceased, was he a policeman?

MS DITHEBE: Yes that is correct.

MR MPSHE: Were you married to him?

MS DITHEBE: Yes we were married.

MR MPSHE: When were you married?

MS DITHEBE: In 1989.

MR MPSHE: Do you have children with him?

MS DITHEBE: Yes I do have a child with him.

MR MPSHE: Do you have a child with him?

MS DITHEBE: Yes that is correct.

MR MPSHE: How old is that child?

MS DITHEBE: The child is nine years old.

MR MPSHE: Does this child attend school?

MS DITHEBE: Yes the child attends school.

MR MPSHE: In which standard is the child?

MS DITHEBE: Standard two.

MR MPSHE: Do you work?

MS DITHEBE: I do not work.

MR MPSHE: Before your husband died did you work?

MS DITHEBE: No I did not work.

MR MPSHE: That means at home you were taken care of byyour husband?

MS DITHEBE: Yes that is correct.

MR MPSHE: Now you say that the child is at school butyou are not working, how do you manage the household?

MS DITHEBE: We are helped by people and so on. Familymembers do come to our rescue.

MR MPSHE: I want you to explain how do you mean thatrelatives assist you?

MS DITHEBE: As far as the child's schooling is concernedthere is government grants that I receive but it's not enoughto help us.

MR MPSHE: After the death of your husband did you institutea case or a charge against someone who killed your husband sothat you will be paid?

MS DITHEBE: No I never did so.

MR MPSHE: Who buried the deceased?

MS DITHEBE: It was myself.

MR MPSHE: I will take it that there were expenses regardingthe funeral or the burial?

MS DITHEBE: Yes that is correct.

MR MPSHE: Can you estimate the cost that you incurredthere for the burial?

MS DITHEBE: It was about 6 000 in costs for the burialthat I incurred.

MR MPSHE: Including everything with respect to the burialof your husband?

MS DITHEBE: Yes that is correct.

MR MPSHE: Was there anyone who assisted you?

MS DITHEBE: No I was alone.

MR MPSHE: Mrs Dithebe this Committee before you it isestablished by a certain law or Act which refers to reconciliationand the truth. What are your views with regards to truth andreconciliation?

MS DITHEBE: As far as reconciliation is concerned myselfas a deceased's wife I cannot forgive the killer or the murdererbecause he could not forgive my husband for what he had done. To show that he apologised he bought two quarts for him but thatnever meant a thing. Based on that I sit here because I heardthat he asked for amnesty. I would not lie because I would notforgive him. If my husband was here I would not be strugglingas I am at the moment. My child would have the warmth of havinga father. He does not have the love of a father of which he couldhave had would his father be living at this time.

MR MPSHE: Let me put it this way Mrs Dithebe if it couldhappen that Tamsanga who killed your husband could come here andmeet you to talk with you and apologise to you how would you takethat matter?

MS DITHEBE: What I am saying is I would not accept hisapology. I would say so but deep down in me I would not haveforgiven him.

MR MPSHE: Is there anything that you want to tell thisCommittee?

MS DITHEBE: To this reconciliation committee what I wouldsay is this, I am not against the aim of this committee but Iam against the killer of my husband. What I would say is thisat the moment I don't have the love of my husband and my childmisses that too. There is no forgiveness that I would directto Mr Jackson. I don't want to lie to the committee even if thecommittee can forgive him but deep down in me I would not forgivehim.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR MPSHE

CHAIRMAN: Are there any questions you would like to putto her?

ADV DE JAGER: Thank you Mr Chairman. Only a couple ofquestions. Mrs Dithebe at the time of your husband's death washe politically active?

MS DITHEBE: He never had any interest in politics.

ADV DE JAGER: No the question is was your husband activelyinvolved in politics at the time of his untimely death?

MS DITHEBE: No.

ADV DE JAGER: Do you know whether your husband had previousconfrontations with Mr Jackson prior to the date of the bad incident,the death?

MS DITHEBE: I do not know of that.

ADV DE JAGER: Mr Jackson testified yesterday that theprevious day your husband threatened him that he would kill him,do you have your own personal knowledge of this fact?

MS DITHEBE: I don't have such knowledge, even duringthe court trial he never mentioned such a thing.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY ADV DE JAGER

JUDGE WILSON: Was this man Jackson a friend of your husband?

MS DITHEBE: He was not a friend to us at all.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Do you have any profession?

MS DITHEBE: I do not have any profession at all, I amnot working as such.

CHAIRMAN: Mr Mpshe will you at a convenient stage enquireinto whether, in the circumstances of this case, whether she wouldbe entitled to any relief under the Act from the Reparations Committeeand if so you will make a report to that effect.

MR MPSHE: That will be done Mr Chairman. Mrs Mewa(?)I think you should understand that I don't want you to be leftwith wrong impressions, I think you should understand that itdoes not necessarily mean that you would get any reparation. There are certain legal requirements which would have to be metbefore you could qualify for that kind of grant. Depending onhow this application is disposed of it may very well be that youcould qualify and depending also on the nature of the outcomeof our decision it may very well be that you do not qualify. It is in fact strictly speaking not this committee that is goingto decide whether you qualify or not but it is the law as it stands. And please do not leave here under the impression that you areautomatically going to qualify for reparation.

CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. You are excused.

WITNESS EXCUSED

MR MPSHE: Thank you Mr Chairman then that sums up evidenceas far as matter number H is concerned.

CHAIRMAN: Yes?

MR : Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman the applicantyesterday in his evidence, as well as in his application statedcertain facts on which he based his application. I must be honestI've got difficulty in supporting this application insofar asit is connected as the act, the offence being committed to obtainor further a political objective. Taking the factors stated insection 20(3) of the Act being the motive, the context in whichthis matter took place or the offence occurred as well as thelegal and factual nature of the act and the gravity of the offencethe objectives as well as the relationship and the directnessand proximity I must admit that I am in dire straits to honestlyand openly state that I feel that a case has been made out tomeet the requirements of section 20 of this Act. I have got nothingfurther to add. Should the Committee wish to hear me on certainother matters I would be glad to respond to that.

CHAIRMAN: Very well, Mr Mpshe?

MR MPSHE: Thank you Mr Chairman. Mr Chairman I am alsoin the same position as my colleague Mr Chairman. Suffice itfor me only to say that the applicant David Jackson did not satisfythe requirements of the Act particularly section 20 and its subsectionsMr Chairman. Mr Chairman will recall in the minutes of the committeethat at one stage under cross-examination by myself I put a questionto him as to any political achievement and he was very clear hesaid nothing politically was achieved by the killing of this man. Mr Chairman and members of the Committee I just want to directand state clearly that this what the applicant did it was donebecause of a fight between himself and the deceased and as hestated in his evidence-in-chief that he did as he did becausehe was defending himself, and it is as simple as all that. Iam at pains Mr Chairman to find any political motivation whatsoever. And I would urge the Committee to find, with respect, likewise. That is all Mr Chairman.

JUDGE MGOEPE: (?) It may be that I am confusing these cases,I know that he said he was defending himself but was the contextof his evidence, does the context of his evidence suggest thathe is trying to say that he was defending just beyond himselfas an individual? Did he not say that the deceased worked fora corrupt government and the deceased was against the community,he had been against the community many times, every time we hadmass action or boycott or rent boycotts, stayaways you would findhim and others assaulting children and people left, right andcentre. I am trying to say to you are we married to the literalwords that come out of his mouth to say I was defending myself,doesn't the context of his evidence suggest that he saw the deceasedas a danger to the community at large?

MR MPSHE: Thank you Mr Chairman and members of the Committee. That is the evidence he gave and that is the impression he wantedto create in the minds of the Committee. But I want to say thisthat we should not lose sight of the fact that this whole incidenthappened as a result of alcohol that was consumed in a tavernat night. And the evidence that he gave in court does not atall suggest that he was acting as he did in protection of thecommunity. It may well be that he said so in evidence when pushingfor his application, but my impression is that he is saying thisas a person who is here to be released out of jail.

JUDGE MGOEPE: Are you saying that had the deceased notbeena policeman and had he not had the idea that the deceasedhad in any case been ...(indistinct) of the community, are yousaying that he would still have killed him anyway had the deceasednot been anything other than a policeman?

MR MPSHE: That is my point, that is my point.

Then Mr Chairman and honourable members of the Committee thatrounds up the roll for the Kroonstad hearing.

CHAIRMAN: The Committee will consider this applicationand makes it decision known in due course.

Ladies and gentlemen we have come to the end of the hearing ofthe Amnesty Committee in Kroonstad. The Committee will now terminateits proceedings and thank you very much for behaving well mostof the time.