Amnesty Hearings

ON RESUMPTION

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, than you. We'll now commence with the application of Mr Anthony Sbonelo Ndlovu. As per usual I would like to ask the representatives kindly to place themselves on record.

MR DEHAL: Thank you, Mr Chairperson. I represent the applicant. I propose calling him only to testify. The name is Dehal from Dehal Incorporated, Durban. Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Dehal.

MR PANDAY: Mr Chairman, the name is Panday, I represent the families of the victims.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Panday.

MS THABETHE: Thank you, Mr Chair. I'm Thabile Thabethe, the Evidence Leader, TRC.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Ms Thabethe.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Ndlovu, do you have any objections to taking the oath, or do you prefer to make an affirmation?

ANTHONY SBONELO NDLOVU: (sworn states)

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Dehal?

EXAMINATION BY MR DEHAL: Thank you, Sir.

Mr Ndlovu, may I show to you this application contained in the bundle on pages 1 to 9, do you confirm that this is your application for amnesty?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, I do.

MR DEHAL: Was this application completed by yourself?

MR NDLOVU: Yes.

MR DEHAL: Are you in a position to confirm the translation thereof, have you been through it? These pages that I show to you, pages 10 to 15.

MR NDLOVU: Yes, I do.

MR DEHAL: Thank you. Now your application is for amnesty in regard to the murder of Victor, and that being the only count, but you say that you didn't kill him, when you arrived there, inasmuch as you intended to kill him, you found him dead, correct?

MR NDLOVU: That's correct.

MR DEHAL: Now I show to you your statement, do you confirm that this is your statement, formulated on your instructions by your attorney and you have signed it?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, I do.

CHAIRPERSON: That statement will be received as Exhibit A.

MR DEHAL: Thank you, Chair.

MR MALAN: May we just again have the confirmation for what it may be necessary, that the contents are true and correct.

MR DEHAL: Thank you.

Mr Ndlovu, do you confirm that the contents of this statement, all the details therein is correct?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, I do.

MR DEHAL: Thank you. Now if I may just take you through your statement. Firstly, you say that you're an adult male, your date of birth is the 28th of February '67, your level of education is standard eight, correct?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, it is so.

MR DEHAL: You say that during 1984 or 1985, you had joined the UDF, you were invited to join the UDF by friends. You all had discussions about policies and decided that this was the party you wished to join. In 1986 you trained at the Natal Mtubatuba Command as a soldier in the South African Defence Force, you were trained in the use of R4 rifles. You attended this training merely so that you could use the knowledge which you there obtained, to fight the struggle and the liberation of the oppressed people in this country, correct?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, that is correct.

MR DEHAL: You then add in paragraph 3, that in July 1989, at the time the offence was committed, you were a member of the UDF. And in paragraph 4, that you did not tell anyone because you were afraid that if the IFP knew that you were a UDF member, you would have been killed for that reason. Is that correct?

MR NDLOVU: That's correct.

MR DEHAL: You then add that you were working at the Rainbow Chicken with Victor Mtetwa, the deceased, who belonged to the IFP, correct is it?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, it is so.

MR DEHAL: In paragraph 6 you say an argument had broken out between yourself and Victor Mtetwa, who had called you an Indian Zulu (I-kulu), because you had curly hair. You were very offended by this word. You continued arguing. You threatened to kill him. On the same afternoon, being a Wednesday, Nduduzi Shelembe, Moli Zunda and Imkiteni had come to your house. You had informed them about the argument with Mr Victor Mtetwa and who had threatened to fire me - oh sorry, fire you, I think dismiss you from work because you told him that you wanted to kill him. You showed them your home-made ammunition. Your friend Shadala had volunteered to help you kill Victor Mtetwa, is that correct?

MR MALAN: Mr Dehal, sorry for interrupting, we went into a brief recess in order to be able to read this. Everyone had an opportunity to read it, Mr Panday had an opportunity to read it and consult. He has confirmed the correctness of each and every bit that's contained in this statement, it's really not necessary to read through it. It is part of the record, I would request you to simply highlight what you need to or add if there's anything not there, please.

MR DEHAL: Thank you, Sir.

Mr Ndlovu, in your application for amnesty, on page - well the Zulu aspect I think would be, perhaps I should get the English aspect first, on page 13 of the bundle in paragraph 10(b) which is contained on page 6 of the original documents, you mention that you were arrested, detained, shortly after the death of Victor and that you were badly treated whilst in detention. You say that the police arrested you and assaulted you every day. It was in 1989 during the state of emergency, that you did not admit to them that you had committed the crime, because had they known they would have simply killed you. You remember that?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, I do remember that.

MR DEHAL: Can you please tell this Committee a little bit about that detention under the state of emergency pursuant to this death of Victor and the difficulties you have, the assault on you.

MR MALAN: Sorry, what is the relevance of the assault?

MR DEHAL: Sorry, just to indicate I think more importantly because of these two statements that were received towards the end, the aspect that links him with the lady who was threatened. And there's a lady whom he will now speak about whose home he was taken to by the police.

MR MALAN: You may proceed.

MR NDLOVU: When I was arrested or maybe let me put it this way, do you want me to relate the story when I was arrested or must I begin from the beginning when I was still working?

MR DEHAL: No, sorry, deal only with the aspect relating to your arrest and where you were taken to a lady's home and the lady discovered that you were being assaulted etc.

CHAIRPERSON: Perhaps Mr Ndlovu if you can explain - as Mr Malan said, we are fully acquainted with what you have said in this statement which you made to Mr Dehal, copies of which are before us all, in which you set out the circumstances leading up to and including the death of Mr Victor Mtetwa. So now if you could just listen to the questions and then answer the questions and perhaps I'll ask Mr Dehal if he would kindly repeat that last question.

MR DEHAL: Certainly, thank you Sir.

Mr Ndlovu, you recall after the death of Victor Mtetwa, you were arrested by the police and held in captivity, do you remember that?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, I do remember that.

MR DEHAL: Do you recall that you were questioned about Victor's death, but you had not admitted it?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, I didn't admit because I was arrested at about past two to quarter to three. When I arrived in the custody they tied me in a bed, they left me there. And there was also a black policeman who was sleeping in that bed and they woke him up before they left. Before I was questioned the black policeman said to me I am also black, if you did commit this crime and if I do agree to these people that I had committed the crime, they will kill me. So he was advising me not to agree, or deny.

MR DEHAL: Yes, and just briefly, you have confirmed that your arrest - sorry, your assault during your captivity was intense, you were taken to different homes where you were assaulted. In the one case you went to a house where an old lady was present and she actually told the police to stop assaulting you. Do you remember that?

MR NDLOVU: I do remember that because on the night when I was arrested the police took me next to a dam in a place called Esinaymeni. They assaulted me and they continued to assault me until they took me to a place where Mabongi was staying.

The police were taking me to all these places without me pointing to the places and when we arrived and Mabongi's place we found a certain lady, it was at about past eleven, and the lady said to us "He just left after he heard the cars pull in outside". We left Mabongi's place and we went to Bhekisisa's place and they arrested Bhekisisa.

Before we arrived at Bhekisisa, we met Jabulani on the road, who is a brother of Mabongi. They chased him and they arrested him and they started assaulting him. They left him there after they assaulted him because they had discovered that it wasn't Mabongi, but his brother.

Bhekisisa, myself, were taken to a police van and also there was a Toyota Hi-Ace, which was white and green underneath. We were put in the Hi-Ace back or boot and one police said to Bhekisisa that I had agreed that we abducted Victor and we killed him. I realised then and there that the policeman was trying to manipulate Bhekisisa to agree and I told Bhekisisa that I didn't agree. And then the police started assaulting me. ...(intervention)

MR MALAN: May I interrupt, I'm sorry. Mr Dehal, will you please take control of your client and lead him on the relevant information related to his application, not what the police did, accusations of what he did or should have done. We need evidence of what he did in order to qualify for amnesty.

MR DEHAL: He embarked on a lengthy answer, I was hoping to interrupt him but I thought he would stop any moment.

You are not - sorry, you are presently in custody but not in regard to this offence, correct?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, that's correct.

MR DEHAL: In fact, relating to the death of Victor Mtetwa you were arrested and of course all that assault on you took place and then you were released and charges were withdrawn against you.

MR NDLOVU: Yes, that's correct.

MR DEHAL: And whilst you were in detention you were there in detention with Bhekisisa, but Bhekisisa remained behind and the charge had been pursued against him and you understand he's been convicted but you don't know quite of what, is that correct?

MR NDLOVU: No, he was not convicted.

MR DEHAL: I see, thank you.

Now the gentleman, Alfeus Mduduzi Mbanjwa, whose statement was just handed to us a short while ago, you do know him for you worked with him at the Rainbow Chicken Farm, is it?

CHAIRPERSON: Seeing that you've made reference to that statement, Mr Dehal, we'll refer to it as Exhibit B.

MR DEHAL: Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: This is the hand-written statement by one, Alfeus Mduduzi Mbanjwa.

MR DEHAL: Thank you, Sir.

Firstly, Mr Ndlovu, you do know Mr Mbanjwa, don't you?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, I do know Mduduzi, but I know him as Mduduzi Shelembe, not Mduduzi Mbanjwa.

MR DEHAL: And you worked with him at Rainbow, did you?

MR NDLOVU: Yes.

MR DEHAL: You and Mduduzi were both UDF members, is that correct?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, that's correct.

MR DEHAL: Thank you. You haven't fully read this statement because it was just handed to us recently, but to the extent that I went through this with you relating to the deceased, Victor, being an IFP man, you and Mduduzi being UDF members and the political state that the country was in then, you confirm that as being correct, don't you?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, that is correct.

MR DEHAL: That is the evidence of the applicant, thank you.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR DEHAL

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, just to fully understand you, Mr Dehal, is he confirming the statement of Mr Mbanjwa to be correct, or just certain aspects of it?

MR DEHAL: Perhaps just to rectify, the following is the problem.

CHAIRPERSON: You said you confirm aspects of the statement relating to Victor belonging to the IFP and him and Mbanjwa, also known to him, to the applicant, as Shelembe, being affiliated to the UDF?

MR DEHAL: Correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Just those aspects?

MR DEHAL: Correct. Sorry Sir, may I just also say that to the extent that he admits on those aspects, it's not as though he's denying the rest of it, it's just that we never had the time to properly go through it. Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Panday?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR PANDAY: Mr Ndlovu, how long did you work for Rainbow Chickens?

MR NDLOVU: I started working there in March 1988 up until July on the 25th of 1992.

MR PANDAY: Why did you stop working until July 1992?

MR NDLOVU: I was dismissed because of many sick leave forms which I've submitted to my employer.

MR PANDAY: And tell me the victim, Mr Mtetwa, he also worked at Rainbow Chickens, is that correct?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, that's correct.

MR PANDAY: Now was he superior to you in the job place?

MR NDLOVU: I will say he was superior but he was not my superior because he was in another department and I was in the dispensary department.

MR PANDAY: Now Mr Ndlovu, in Exhibit A of your application, on page 1 paragraph 6 you mention that there was a dispute or a problem between the two of you in that he called you an Indian Zulu (I-kulu), is that correct?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, that's correct.

MR PANDAY: Now was this more an insult to your person or to you personally, was this a personal insult?

MR NDLOVU: The name "koelie" was used by the IFP, insulting the ANC because they used to say that ANC members like to perm their hair. They were words which were used by IFP to insult ANC and also they were words which were used by ANC to insult IFP members.

MR PANDAY: Now were these words of such political power for you to threaten to kill the victim?

MR NDLOVU: It is not the words which would result in killing someone.

MR PANDAY: Now what would result in killing someone?

MR NDLOVU: Would you please repeat your question for me.

MR PANDAY: You said that the words won't result in killing someone, what would someone have to do for them to be killed?

MR DEHAL: I think it would be fair to ask him more pertinently "Why did you kill Mtetwa?", in this particular case, otherwise ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, because we know there's many things you know, love triangles, all sorts of motives and if he expresses and opinion it might not really be relevant to this matter.

MR PANDAY: I concede the point, Mr Chairman.

Mr Ndlovu, you threatened to kill Mr Mtetwa, because he called an Indian Zulu. Now it is my submission that this threat that you extended to him was more personal than political. Would you deny or confirm that?

MR DEHAL: Sorry, I'm not objecting to the question, I just think it's factually incorrect because the statement says in paragraph 7 - I think it's because I didn't read it, that my learned colleague is now confining it to the aspects I read. He says in the broader spectrum this had little to do with him, in paragraph 7

"His calling me an Indian was insignificant in a broader eventual subsequent political role."

And then in paragraph 8 he says various political aspects had caused him to go against Victor Mtetwa. Thank you.

MR PANDAY: I think, Mr Chairman, if I may just respond. One has to look at his intent ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: No, you can ask the question. Mr Dehal was just pointing out that that was, I think - correct me if I'm wrong, that was the start of the problems between the two and then after that as set out in 7 and 8, he formulated further opinions about the deceased. But you can ask the question, Mr Panday.

MR PANDAY: I've forgotten my line of thought there, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: You were saying that the insult was personal rather than political.

MR PANDAY: Mr Ndlovu, the insult by him calling you Indian Zulu, is it correct that this was more a personal insult as opposed to being a political insult?

MR NDLOVU: What I can say is that one cannot be killed because he had insulted someone, but at the time everyone in Hammarsdale knew that those words were used among IFP insulting ANC, like we UDF members, we also had words which we used to insult IFP members. It was more than uttering those words, it was more political.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Ndlovu, you also say in your statement that you kept your political affiliation a secret, is that correct? You said in paragraph 4

"I did not tell anyone because I was afraid that if IFP knew that I was a UDF member, I would have got killed."

Why then do you think Mr Mtetwa called you I-kulu if he didn't know what your political affiliation was?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, he didn't know that I was UDF or ANC, but the way I was dressed and also the fact that I had permed my hair and also I had a ...(indistinct) and white takkies, we never fought before, but as soon as I approached there and he said to me am I also a "Koelie", and I told him that I didn't like those words and then he said to me that the way I am dressed, it tells him more about me and it also tells him that I am really a "Koelie".

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you. Mr Panday?

MR PANDAY: Now Mr Ndlovu, the reason I ask you these questions is because my instructions from the family are that the actual reason for the killing of Victor Mtetwa was due to a problem that stemmed at work and it was not because of him being an IFP, because they admit that he was an IFP, the family. It was the problem that you and he had at work and not political. Would you like to comment on that?

MR NDLOVU: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Please do.

MR NDLOVU: We didn't have any problems at work because I was far from his department. If I can estimate a distance between my department and his stores, first it's my department which is the dispensary and then stock control and then packaging ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: I don't think we need to know all the departments, but you say it was far away from you?

MR NDLOVU: ...(no English interpretation)

CHAIRPERSON: You didn't work in the same vicinity to each other, day in and day out? In the same office or in the same room.

MR NDLOVU: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Panday.

MR PANDAY: Now if you didn't work in close proximity, how was it possible for Victor Mtetwa to have contact with you and calling you names, how did this become possible?

MR NDLOVU: We were using the same buses and sometimes we will meet in the change rooms, even though he usually didn't use our change room, he was another change room which was a floor above.

MR PANDAY: Tell me, did he only call you an Indian Zulu once, or many times?

MR NDLOVU: It wasn't once because the problem started after he had called me names and then it went on until he started calling me UDF, and also myself I was calling him IFP. It went on. After I told him that I was going to kill him, he also told me that he was going to kill me as well.

MR PANDAY: So based on what you say to us now, that at the end of the day you wanted to kill him because of this name-calling and not because of the political problems that may have existed between the IFP and the ANC.

MR NDLOVU: No, it is not so.

MR PANDAY: So if this name-calling wasn't so important, why threaten to kill him in the first place?

MR NDLOVU: Would you please repeat your question.

CHAIRPERSON: The question was why did you threaten to kill him after he called you I-kulu. It's quite clear from your statement, Exhibit A, that when you argued after he called you I-kulu, at that stage, immediately then you threatened to kill him. That's paragraph 6 on page 1

"I was very offended by this word. We continued arguing. I threatened to kill him."

Now Mr Panday is saying, if you now say that the words themselves weren't all that important in the overall scheme of things, he's asking you why did you actually threaten to kill him. - merely for uttering those words.

MR NDLOVU: I think I had already mentioned this before, that he had already described the way I had dressed ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, we know why he called you that, but what Mr Panday wants to know is, why did you threaten to kill him because he called you I-kulu. Why did you threaten to kill him?

MR NDLOVU: Him as well, he did say he was going to kill me ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: You've said that, but what Mr Panday wants to know is why did you threaten to kill him. And he's suggesting to you, you threatened to kill him purely because he called you I-kulu, is that correct?

MR NDLOVU: I think I'm now confused in this questioning.

CHAIRPERSON: Alright, perhaps you can ask it again, try some other way.

MR PANDAY: Mr Ndlovu, I'm going to go through it slowly. Do you agree that the name Indian Zulu or I-kulu, you did not like that name? Do you agree?

MR NDLOVU: No.

MR PANDAY: Now Victor Mtetwa called you Indian Zulu, you did not like that, that is correct, right. Now you say that you did not think in the broader sense when you went to kill him and kidnap him, or kidnap him and kill him, that the word Indian Zulu was so important to kill someone. Do you agree with that?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, I did say so.

MR PANDAY: Now if the word Indian Zulu was not that important to kill someone, why did you threaten to kill Victor Mtetwa when he called you Indian Zulu?

MR NDLOVU: I did mention before that the word will not result to losing someone's life, but the problem between Victor and myself didn't end there, he went on describing my clothes. I didn't just say immediately after he called me an Indian Zulu, that I was going to kill him, but I did say on the same time as we were arguing that I was going to kill him.

MR PANDAY: And what else were you arguing about that you threatened to kill him?

MR NDLOVU: Honestly Victor was a Secretary of the IFP, even at work. And also there was a colleague of mine who was a member of UDF, whom police were always after him and they were not in good terms with Victor at all.

MR PANDAY: What did all of this have to do with killing Victor? The police were after your colleague, Victor wasn't after your colleague. Victor was only the Secretary of the IFP. Now what did this have to do with killing him?

MR NDLOVU: The person who had seen to it that police were after my friend, was Victor. This is what Victor himself said.

MR PANDAY: Now Mr Ndlovu, what was your role in the UDF, what position did you hold in the UDF?

MR NDLOVU: In the UDF the position that I held was to be an SDU. Because the reason we were trained was because Mr Archie Gumede had selected us and sent us for the training and some of us went to the training and we were trained and we came back to the community.

MR PANDAY: Now in the community when you came back, who was in charge of you?

CHAIRPERSON: Who was your commander in charge of you? Who did you report to, if anybody?

MR NDLOVU: The late Mandla Khanyile.

MR PANDAY: Now when did Mandla Khanyile die?

MR NDLOVU: If I'm not mistaken, I think towards the end of 1990, because when Mandla Khanyile was killed it was during the last violence of Hammarsdale.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, just before you proceed, while you're on that point.

Are you saying then - sorry, when was Victor killed, what year was he killed? 1989?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, in 1989.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you saying that the ANC or UDF had Self Defence Units at that time?

MR NDLOVU: When Self Defence Units were launched as a Self Defence Unit, we had already had our Defence Unit inside the community, even though we were not calling it the Self Defence Unit before the actual Self Defence Unit.

MR PANDAY: Mr Ndlovu, you said that you were trained by the later Archie Gumede and you were sent to ...(intervention)

MR DEHAL: Selected by Mr Archie Gumede and sent ...

MR PANDAY: ... selected by Mr Archie Gumede and sent for training and you were already an SDU or a trained Self Defence Unit member. Now you said after that you were sent back to the area to protect the community. Now why is there a conflict in your evidence to say that the SDU was still to be formed in the area?

MR NDLOVU: The reason we met with Archie, in 1985 I was already a member of UDF and most people, more especially the youth, ran away because IFP members used to remove us from our homes and force us to go to rallies and meetings and I ran away and some of the youth ran away to Claremont.

And when we met in 1985, we used to meet in a certain house in Pinetown which was called Cosatu House. That's where I was told that we can put our applications so that we go to the military in 121 Battalion in Mtubatuba, and go and train there. And some of them joined power at Escom and they went there for training. They told us we can choose any of these military camps to go and train.

MR PANDAY: Mr Ndlovu, who gave the instruction to have Victor Mtetwa killed?

MR MALAN: Just before you proceed, please Mr Panday.

Mr Ndlovu, in your statement you say in paragraph 2, this is Annexure A, that you were trained in 1986 at the Mtubatuba Command as a soldier in the South African Defence Force, is that correct?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, that's correct.

MR MALAN: So you joined the Defence Force, is that correct? You became a member.

MR NDLOVU: No, I was not a member of the South African Defence Force. There were stages, recruitment and handling of firearms and all I did was to be trained on handling firearms or selection.

MR MALAN: You say you started in March '88 with Rainbow Chickens, where did you work before? Sorry, Mr Panday, I just want to get clarity on this issue.

MR NDLOVU: I never worked before.

CHAIRPERSON: How long were you associated with the South African Defence Force?

MR NDLOVU: I do not remember whether it was two weeks or more than two weeks. I think on my application it was written that on the 2nd of February, but then I received another one before the 2nd of February, that I should come on that 14th of July 1986. I left on the 12th of July, it was on a Sunday, and I started training on the Monday. I think it was on the 13th. I don't remember when I came back. That's when I came back.

MR MALAN: Why did they train you?

MR NDLOVU: Because we had requested that we needed to be trained and also I actually applied to work there, but my aim was not work there but to be trained.

MR MALAN: Who else went with you for training?

MR NDLOVU: No-one from Hammarsdale. Among the people whom I was with, there was no-one from Hammarsdale. On the 12th when I went there it was Mkhandu, Blackie, Makhati Mhlanga.

MR MALAN: Ja, no we don't need those names. Were they IFP supporters or ANC supporters?

MR NDLOVU: ANC. Nkambatini is my home and I was not from Hammarsdale ...(intervention)

MR MALAN: No, you don't have to answer things I'm not asking you, just answer my questions and when you've answered them you can stop talking. How were those people recruited? Did you apply for a job for the SADF, is that what you were telling us?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, I applied for a job.

MR MALAN: And they gave you a job?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, they did accept my application.

MR MALAN: And you were paid because you were now a soldier at the SADF.

MR NDLOVU: No.

MR MALAN: Now the other people - what did they train the people in, tell us a little bit about the nature of the training. Did they simply show you R4 rifles and tell you how to shoot? Is that your evidence? Or what did they do?

MR NDLOVU: When we arrived there we were divided and we were grouped into small groups of 40, 40, 40. I was under alphabet G and that alphabet G was Golf Company and A was Alpha. I was under G Group and it was the 40 of us. First days we were to see the doctor ...(intervention)

MR MALAN: Please listen to my question again. I simply asked you what did the training consist of, what did they teach you? Did they teach you to shoot, did they hand you a gun and show you how to shoot?

MR NDLOVU: I was taught to dismantle the gun.

MR MALAN: Yes, and what else?

MR NDLOVU: And also to carry heavy sacks and we went to the airport.

CHAIRPERSON: Did they teach you to shoot? To use a gun.

MR NDLOVU: Yes, they did.

MR MALAN: Now when was that done, on the first day, on the second day or after a month or after three months?

MR NDLOVU: During the first week. I think on Thursday, that's when they gave us the guns, on our fourth day there.

MR MALAN: Now how many months did you stay with them?

MR NDLOVU: I think it was about two weeks, between one week and two weeks.

MR MALAN: And then how did you leave, why did you leave after two weeks?

MR NDLOVU: I actually thought that I was well-trained.

CHAIRPERSON: What did you do, did you just leave yourself, just walk away from it, desert, or did they tell you to go or what - under what circumstances did you leave? That's what Mr Malan wants to know.

MR NDLOVU: I was not told. Usually they will tell us in the morning that if one didn't like to stay there anymore he can board one of the cars there and they will drop in town and they will give him a ticket and he can go back home.

MR MALAN: Then lastly. When Mr Gumede had you selected for training, why didn't you tell them that you had been trained?

MR NDLOVU: The only person who knew how to speak to Mr Gumede was Mandla Khanyile or among us we will send Mandla Khanyile to speak to Mr Gumede, but it wasn't any of us that can speak to Mr Gumede.

MR MALAN: Then on this point, you were asked in your amnesty application, questions 8(a) and (b), whether you were ever a member of the Security Forces, now you say you did take a job there, why didn't you tell us about this?

MR NDLOVU: When I was preparing my application I was being helped by a policeman and also the fact that I didn't even have the Force number because they didn't employ, they employed me and then I left before I qualified or before I started working for them. Therefore I didn't even have the Force number.

ADV SANDI: Just to come back to the realities of your application, Mr Ndlovu, tell us in a nutshell why was Mr Victor Mtetwa killed.

MR NDLOVU: The reason which led to the death of Victor Mtetwa was that he was the Secretary of the IFP and also that he was an informer of the police, informing about the UDF members.

ADV SANDI: How did you know that he was an informer of the police?

MR NDLOVU: I've mentioned before that there was a colleague of ours who had been chased by police all the time and he told me that Victor was an informer.

ADV SANDI: Did he tell you why he thought Victor was an informer?

MR NDLOVU: Would you please repeat your question.

ADV SANDI: That colleague of yours you've just talked about, did he tell you why he thought Victor was an informer?

MR NDLOVU: Even though we were close, myself and this colleague of mine, he told me outside work, not at work.

ADV SANDI: This colleague of yours, does he have a name, what is his name?

MR NDLOVU: Happy Dlomo(?)

ADV SANDI: Why did he think Victor Mtetwa was an informer?

MR NDLOVU: Happy was a guard or a security guard at work, he was responsible for searching us. When I started working in the Rainbow farm, he was already there and I didn't know that Happy was a trained UDF member. Even though I don't how IFP members contacted each other, but I knew that we as UDF members we didn't reveal openly but later I knew that Happy was a trained UDF member.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Panday?

MR PANDAY: Mr Ndlovu, before we went onto the lengthy testimony on your Defence Force application, it is correct that since 1985 you were a UDF member. Now you accept that the SADF was the then apartheid government's organisation, do you accept that?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, I do.

MR PANDAY: Now if you were against the government and the policies of the government which made you become a UDF supporter, why is it that you joined the SADF, which was a government organisation?

MR NDLOVU: The only objective was to be trained, not to become a soldier.

MR PANDAY: And isn't it correct that you could have been trained by Archie Gumede who was recruiting people for training?

CHAIRPERSON: I think on this, Mr Panday, we seem to wasting a very lot of time on this Defence Force. He said that they were told by people at Cosatu House to go and join and they obviously knew that this sort of system worked. You could go there for two weeks and get a free instruction on how to lug heavy weights and put arms together and shoot them. So they took use of that, then only after that Mr Gumede came. He didn't know when he went to the Defence Force that some time in the future he would be selected to do training anywhere else.

MR PANDAY: Mr Chairman, the point is that ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Is it disputed that he went to the Defence Force?

MR PANDAY: Well one would dispute it in the sense, Mr Chairman, that he's an active UDF member since '84 ...(indistinct - no microphone)

MR MALAN: Your microphone.

MR PANDAY: ... being active from '84, he would have already known by now that you could have obtained training from the UDF itself. Now there's no basis for joining the SADF to substantiate.

CHAIRPERSON: Well he said that they were told at Cosatu in Pinetown to do that. You can argue that he was never a member of the Defence Force, if you feel that there's good argument for that.

MR DEHAL: And Mr Chairperson, there's no evidence to suggest that if you're a UDF member, however active, that you would know you can be recruited for training.

CHAIRPERSON: Anyway let's leave this for argument I think.

MR PANDAY: Mr Ndlovu, you mentioned that Mandla Khanyile was your commander, when the question was put to you, now for you to have gone and killed Victor Mtetwa, would he have to have given the instruction?

MR NDLOVU: Since there was Happy at work, I was going to tell Mandla about Victor because Mandla didn't know anything about Victor. Because the decision to kill Victor was not taken on the very same Tuesday when we argued.

MR PANDAY: Now did Mandla eventually decide that Victor must be killed?

MR NDLOVU: The decision that Victor should be killed was taken on Wednesday after I submitted my sick leave. On Tuesday I went to see the doctor, Dr Hitchcock and the following day, on Wednesday evening, because our shift was from five in the morning until two in the afternoon, Mduduzi Shelembe and Skadla Magubane and Mkipeni Moli Zuma, they came and these are the people who told me that at work Victor didn't report that I had submitted a sick leave, but he said that we ANC members were going to resign to just leave work, as I had already done.

MR PANDAY: Mr Ndlovu, my question to you is simply, did Mandla Khanyile make the decision to kill Victor Mtetwa? He was your commander, did he make the decision to kill Victor Mtetwa?

MR NDLOVU: Yes.

MR PANDAY: Now I'm going to refer you to Exhibit A, page 2. You say in paragraph 10, you mention that Victor was identified as a legitimate target. The comrades in the area decided on a plan to eliminate him. Who are the comrades you refer to?

MR NDLOVU: I'm referring to Mandla Khanyile and them.

MR PANDAY: Mandla Khanyile and who else?

MR NDLOVU: Mandla Khanyile, Mabongi, Thiza Ndlovu. After discussing the matter with these three I knew that the decision was taken and it was final.

MR PANDAY: And do you still maintain that the killing of Victor Mtetwa was because he was an IFP supporter and not that he insulted you?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, because he was a member of IFP and also he was an informer.

MR PANDAY: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR PANDAY

CHAIRPERSON: Do you have any questions, Ms Thabethe?

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS THABETHE: Yes, Mr Chair, I do, thanks.

Mr Ndlovu, as a point of clarification, on paragraph 6 you ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Of what, the application or the statement?

MS THABETHE: Of the name I-khula, Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct - no microphone)

MS THABETHE: Sorry Annexure A, sorry. Paragraph 6 of Annexure A, sorry Exhibit A. I realise on the second line there that is I-kula, Mr Chair, not I-kulu.

CHAIRPERSON: Is that I-kula?

MS THABETHE: Yes, Mr Chair.

MR DEHAL: My apologies.

MS THABETHE: No problem.

It's meaning is - it's a Zulu word for Indian, is that correct?

MR NDLOVU: Yes.

MS THABETHE: It doesn't mean Indian Zulu, correct?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, when one says I-kula, it means Indian.

MS THABETHE: Now you would agree with me that in the 1989s/'88, people used to be referred to as Indians or Coloureds when they had curly hair, because of the perm that was in fashion then.

MR NDLOVU: Yes.

MS THABETHE: Not necessarily because they belonged to ANC, correct?

MR NDLOVU: No, it is not so.

MS THABETHE: What do you mean ...(Zulu), are you agreeing with me?

MR NDLOVU: No, I disagree with you. The name I-kula was used by IFP members insulting members of the ANC.

MS THABETHE: I put it to you, Mr Ndlovu - this is just for clarification, I put it to you Mr Ndlovu, that the name I-kula or a Coloured person, was a name that was used for any person who had permed hair, irrespective of which political organisation he belonged to.

MR DEHAL: Mr Chairperson, I can't see on what basis this could be, there is no evidence ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Anyway she's put it - I think you put the point across that you've said that it is ...

MS THABETHE: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: I think we won't certainly be able to make a finding on this unless we get some sort of expert evidence on it. We as a Committee won't find one way or the other, it's the first time we know about it. But we know it's in dispute.

MS THABETHE: Mr Chair, it was just for clarification that I-kula was not a word that had any connotations to any political organisation.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, of which the applicant disagrees with you.

MR DEHAL: My only difficulty was that when she used the word "put", we all understand in rule of law, "put" is based on - when you put something it's based on evidence. I don't think Ms Thabethe has any evidence for it, nor is she an expert to testify in that regard. I understand it's clarity.

MS THABETHE: Mr Chair, I don't need to be an expert on this, I lived in KwaZulu Natal, I am talking about something I knew.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I think if we can carry on with the cross-examination, we won't get into this debate now.

MS THABETHE: Thank you, Mr Chair.

In your evidence Mr Ndlovu, you've indicated that you were involved in the kidnapping of the deceased, is that correct, and not in the killing of the deceased?

MR NDLOVU: Yes.

MS THABETHE: Why were you not involved in - why didn't you participate in the killing of the deceased?

MR NDLOVU: In those circumstances I am actually blaming Mabongi, because at that time the police were already looking for Victor. When we left the area of Bhekisisa with Victor, Mabongi and then arrived with him in that house.

MS THABETHE: Maybe I didn't put my question correctly. You see in paragraph 9 of Exhibit A, you indicated you informed them that you wanted to kill Victor Mtetwa at the taxi rank, and then your evidence is that you abducted Victor Mtetwa. My question is - maybe let me start by asking, what was your intention when you abducted Victor Mtetwa?

MR NDLOVU: I was going to kill him but not there, I was going to take him to Pinetown and kill him in Pinetown. He was killed there before he arrived to Pinetown.

MS THABETHE: So would you say you are associating yourself with the killing that eventually took place, or you disassociate yourself?

MR NDLOVU: I do associate myself with everything because the people who actually killed him, they didn't know him, I'm the one who showed him to them.

MS THABETHE: Thank you - no, Mr Chair, I haven't finished.

I'm coming back to the implicated persons. The deceased was working with you, Fineas or Skadla was working with you, correct?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, that's correct.

MS THABETHE: Now Mduduzi Mbanjwa denies his involvement in the planning and in the killing of Victor. It's on paragraph 7 of Exhibit B, which is his statement. What is your response to that denial?

MR NDLOVU: ...(no English interpretation)

MS THABETHE: Sorry, it's my mistake, I mean Fineas Mbanjwa.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, also known as Mduduzi Shelembe to the applicant. He says in paragraph 7 of his statement

"I never hated Victor because of our political differences and I was in no way never involved in the planning of the killing or killing of Victor."

That's what Mduduzi says. Whereas you in your application form for amnesty, page 14, paragraph 11(b) say in response to a question -

"Who gave orders or approval for the deed?"

... you include Mduduzi Shelembe. He says he wasn't in any way involved, what do you say to that?

MR NDLOVU: Mduduzi was working in the receiving bay together with Moli, Zuma, Nkepeni. He's the one who brought all these other persons in my house on Wednesday.

CHAIRPERSON: So do you still maintain that he was involved in the planning of the murder of Victor? Because he says he wasn't.

MR NDLOVU: Yes, I still stand by that.

MS THABETHE: Also in his statement, Mr Mbanjwa indicates that the fact that the deceased was an IFP member and he was the Secretary of the IFP, was not an issue, they used to visit each other. How come was it an issue to you?

MR NDLOVU: Would you please repeat your question.

MS THABETHE: I'm saying, Mduduzi Mbanjwa who was also a UDF member like yourself, has given - in his affidavit he indicates that despite the fact that the deceased was an IFP member and the Secretary of the IFP, they still visited each other, there was no enmity between the two of them. My question is, how does it come about that that was an issue to you, when it wasn't an issue to another UDF member or other UDF members?

MR NDLOVU: Mduduzi is a resident in 1 and 2 and I'm a resident in 1 and 4, near Victor's place. I wouldn't link what he said and what he did ...(intervention)

MS THABETHE: Thank you, Mr Chair, I have no further questions.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MS THABETHE

CHAIRPERSON: Also in his statement, Mr Mbanjwa whom you know as Shelembe, says that he was never your friend and he was never involved in any operations with you and that he didn't make friends with, who he refers to "youngsters", and he always associated himself with elderly people. That's paragraph 13 of his statement. He says he was never involved in any operations with you and you were not his friend, what do you say to that?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, he was not my friend but they came to my home, not because he was my friend, he only came to my home to report about what Victor had done at work, not that we were friends.

CHAIRPERSON: Have you finished, Ms Thabethe?

MS THABETHE: Yes, Mr Chair, thank you.

MR PANDAY: Mr Chairman, before Mr Dehal re-examines, if I may just put ...

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

FURTHER CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR PANDAY: Mr Ndlovu, when Ms Thabethe, the Evidence Leader, put to you that I-kula referred to one who had a perm and that people should call them Indians, you denied that by saying no, it was a political connotation, is that correct? And not just ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: No, he agreed that it was with people who - it did refer to people who had perms in their hair, but he said it also had another connotation and the IFP used it as a form as insult. So he didn't deny what Ms Thabethe said about ...(intervention)

MR PANDAY: Mr Chairman, the point he made is that he took it in the sense to it have been a political connotation and ...(indistinct - no microphone) in question.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR PANDAY: Now Mr Ndlovu, you maintain that the word I-kula referred to your political affiliation, now my question to you is that in paragraph 7 of Exhibit A, line 1 reads as follows

"His calling me an Indian was insignificant in a broader sense."

Now you firstly maintain that the word I-kula is of political connotation and that's why you took offense.

MR DEHAL: Sorry, can I just apologise, that's an error on the part of my draughting. I think just being an Indian myself, knowing ...(intervention)

MR MALAN: No, just a second, may he answer first and then ...

MR DEHAL: Well I thought myself duty bound to place what I consider.

CHAIRPERSON: Are you saying the drafting should be I-kula?

MR DEHAL: Indeed.

CHAIRPERSON: So we substitute the word "Indian" for "I-kula".

MR DEHAL: Correct.

CHAIRPERSON: I don't think it is going to affect your question is it?

MR PANDAY: Mr Chairman, the problem we're going to have is that this entire dispute, the entire application brought, the issue that will decide on amnesty is whether the applicant acted politically or out of personal vendetta.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes.

MR PANDAY: Now my problem is that if we're going to continue correcting an affidavit which was sworn, attested and the truthfulness and correctness was attested to in the beginning of the Inquiry, and that is why Mr Chairman's brother, Mr Malan, asked that the correctness be attested to.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, but I think you're misreading. My understanding was that the word, the Zulu word, correct me if I'm wrong, that the word I-kula means Indian. Now we have in paragraph 7, the English word Indian, is it not the same as I-kula?

MR PANDAY: That point is conceded, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: So that's what I'm saying, go ahead with your question, it makes no difference. If he wants to change the word Indian to mean I-kula, it's not going to change anything at all.

MR PANDAY: I concede, Mr Chairman, but my point wasn't going to revolve around the word Indian.

Now Mr Ndlovu, you maintain that the word I-kula you took political offense to the word, because it identified you as to which party you belonged, is that correct?

MR NDLOVU: I saw it as a political insult because we didn't just stop there, we argued further.

MR PANDAY: Then why in paragraph 7 do you merely indicate to me being called Indian was not an important factor?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, it wasn't such an important factor, but then it went on 'cause I also told him that why he must stop calling me I-kula and then he went on and said that because he had realised that I was ANC and also he had realised so because of my clothing.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, Mr Panday.

Now let's assume that he did say that, what's the problem with that? Weren't you proud of being ANC? Why should somebody who says you are ANC, make you want to kill him? If you are an ANC and you're proud of the fact that you're ANC, why would that make you want to kill him? If you went to somebody and said you're IFP and that person who you were speaking to was in fact IFP, why should that give him motive to kill you? I can't understand it.

MR NDLOVU: It was because at the time the UDF was in constant trouble. If they were to know that you were a UDF member, you'll be in trouble or maybe sometimes you'll be killed. That's why we all kept it as secret and we all knew that even if you were to be killed, you were not going to reveal other UDF members.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I understand now. What you're saying is that by him calling you an ANC, you took it to be some sort of implied threat against your safety.

MR NDLOVU: Yes, I mean that.

MR MALAN: Just before you proceed. And yet in the same paragraph you continue to say that with time you forgot about it and you ascribed it simply to his sense of immaturity. You don't say that this escalated, you say I forgot about it. Why did you say that? This is paragraph 7 of the statement that Mr Dehal drafted after having consulted with you.

CHAIRPERSON: Last sentence.

MR NDLOVU: Yes, I did put it out of my mind after that, but after a while it came back to me and I thought that he might kill me because at that time when we had that altercation no-one apologised to the other.

MR MALAN: Mr Panday?

MR PANDAY: Mr Ndlovu, tell me, when you were working at the Rainbow Chicken, did you have curly hair?

MR NDLOVU: My hair was permed at the time.

MR PANDAY: I put it to you that one, your political affiliation was a secret, nobody knew of it and two, that Mr Mtetwa was merely calling you an Indian because you had curly hair, a perm, and he himself didn't know that you were ANC, as you put it to this Commission.

MR NDLOVU: That is not correct.

MR PANDAY: Nothing further.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR PANDAY

CHAIRPERSON: Do you have any re-examination, Mr Dehal?

RE-EXAMINATION BY MR DEHAL: Yes, thank you Sir.

Mr Ndlovu, inasmuch as you have mentioned that you have forgotten the term I-kula as being defamatory and insulting and hurting to you, is it correct that in paragraph 8 of your statement - look at paragraph 8, Exhibit A, you say that -

"Subsequently Victor Mtetwa was seen to be actively engaged in an anti-progressive, anti-ANC stance."

Correct?

MR NDLOVU: That is correct.

MR DEHAL: And then in our statement - just to deal with those, you say

"To mention briefly, Victor Mtetwa aligned himself squarely with the IFP, was discovered as one who identified leading ANC activists in our area and caused them to be executed."

Do you remember that?

MR NDLOVU: That is correct.

MR DEHAL: And then what you mentioned about him being an informer, you deal with in the next sentence. You say

"He was an informer to the police and to his seniors in the IFP in addition against us in the ANC."

That is correct.

MR DEHAL: And then most important you then say

"He intensified his struggle against us and he (that's he, Victor Mtetwa) single-handedly, and acting in concert with his IFP warlords, was the cause of the deaths of many of our comrades, causing us grief, loss of life, damage to property. So much so that we lived in tyranny and constant fear of death as being always at our doors."

Do you remember saying that? Is that correct?

MR NDLOVU: That is correct.

MR DEHAL: And then you conclude in that paragraph saying that

"Despite all that, some people who even lived in ANC areas who were not activists, were killed purely because they lived in those areas."

MR NDLOVU: That is correct.

MR DEHAL: You ascribe such deaths to Victor Mtetwa, or do you not?

MR NDLOVU: Some were killed because of him because of his place of employment he was able to move in that area where a few ANC people lived.

MR DEHAL: Yes, then in paragraph 10, the annunciation is that Victor Mtetwa was identified - do you see that, identified as a legitimate target and that the comrades in your area decided on a plan to eliminate him, is that correct?

MR PANDAY: Sorry, Mr Chairman, just a point of order here. I think what's being merely put before this Commission, what's in the affidavit, there's some direction in the re-examination.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I think this ...(intervention)

MR PANDAY: ...(indistinct - no microphone) matter any further.

MR DEHAL: Sorry, I gathered that but I'm leading up to something else, sorry.

And then under cross-examination you mentioned that the comrades here refers to Victor - sorry, Mandla Khanyile and two others. Do you remember that?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, I do.

MR DEHAL: So based on this, would you agree that the killing of Victor Mtetwa was not just because of the I-kula incident, that you had by then forgotten. The broader spectrum was that Victor Mtetwa was this activist in the IFP ...(intervention)

MR MALAN: ...(indistinct - no microphone) Alright, continue Mr Dehal.

MR DEHAL: No, sorry, I'm just reiterating his evidence, it's not my opinion, with respect.

MR MALAN: No, you ask him whether he agrees with you, I mean that was his statement, that's what he said.

MR DEHAL: No, there was - I'm re-examining, there was much cross-examination about, from Mr Panday particularly, that the death was purely as a result of the I-kula thing and I'm just ..(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, carry on, Mr Dehal.

MR DEHAL: Thank you, Sir.

Mr Ndlovu, the question is this, the killing of Victor Mtetwa was not purely because of the I-kula word, you had by then much forgotten about that and in the broader spectrum, Victor Mtetwa was an activist in the IFP, whose activity caused the deaths of many people, correct?

MR NDLOVU: That is correct.

MR DEHAL: Now arising from Ms Thabethe's questioning, if Victor Mtetwa was not killed that day and you were on your way to the room where you found his body, had you found him alive would you have killed him in the pursuance of your earlier decision to execute him?

MR NDLOVU: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, just while you're on that, Mr Dehal.

You said in your evidence that your actual intention was to take him to Pinetown and kill him in Pinetown, that's what you said, yet in paragraph 9 of Exhibit A you say - and I'm reading the last sentence of that paragraph -

"I had informed them that I wanted to kill Victor Mtetwa at the taxi rank as he would be asking his transport from Hammarsdale to Pinetown."

Why do you say in your statement you wanted to kill him at the taxi rank but in your evidence you say well, you wanted to take him to Pinetown?

MR NDLOVU: The taxi rank is in Pinetown because from work at Rainbow, he will travel to Pinetown and from there to Hammarsdale. Therefore we would have boarded the same taxi with him from Hammarsdale and attack him at Pinetown taxi rank.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, okay, thank you. Mr Dehal.

MR DEHAL: Thank you.

Mr Ndlovu, sorry I've got an interpreter behind me from my offices who told me that when you were questioned by Mr Panday about how would you have made contact with the deceased, Victor Mtetwa, you mentioned some things about change room which were interpreted, but in addition you said you also travelled with him in the same bus. Did you ever mention that, or am I incorrect? That part about the same bus was not interpreted, that's why I'm raising it with you.

MR NDLOVU: Will you please repeat that question.

MR DEHAL: Sorry, do you remember being questioned by Mr Panday about your version that you had not made contact with Victor Mtetwa because he worked a distance away from you within Rainbow, and how could he then have mentioned I-kula to you, you said well, you did make contact with him on occasions in the change room because you shared the same change room, remember that?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, I do remember.

MR DEHAL: Did you also travel on the same bus?

MR NDLOVU: We would use one car sometimes because there were many vehicles belonging to the company, so you could use any.

MR DEHAL: Yes. You were questioned at some length about how you got to know that Victor Mtetwa was indeed the IFP activist you say he was. Your answer was to the effect that you were informed about this and you dealt with Happy Dlomo, who was a UDF man and a security guard at Rainbow. Do you remember that?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, that is correct.

MR DEHAL: Now it is your evidence that you and the comrades in the UDF or SDU, had identified the deceased as a legitimate target, was there any intelligence gathering work done to establish the authenticity of this information that Victor Mtetwa was an informer, that he was an IFP Secretary and all the other aspects that you talked about, namely that Victor Mtetwa caused the deaths of various comrades etc?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, we did take action in that regard.

MR DEHAL: Sorry, bear with me Sir. That is all, thank you.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR DEHAL

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Malan, do you have any questions you'd like to ask?

MR MALAN: I will try and contain it to a few, Chair.

Mr Ndlovu, in your application on page 11 of the bundle, under 99(a)(iv), that's the bottom of the bundle, and I'm referring now to the translated version, you say -

"I kidnapped the deceased - kidnapped, abducted the deceased from Webber place. We took him to taxis which were also highjacked from Webber."

Is that correct, did you highjack the taxis?

MR NDLOVU: That is correct.

MR MALAN: And you transferred him from one taxi to another by force you say, when read on page 12. Is that correct?

MR NDLOVU: That is correct.

MR MALAN: Now if you look at your statement Exhibit A, paragraph 13, at the bottom of page 2, you describe there in paragraph 12 how you waited. And 13 then you say when he boarded the taxi there was only place for him and you got to another taxi and you asked him to follow that taxi and then you say, the second-last line

"I paid the entire board for 15 passengers."

Is that true?

MR NDLOVU: That is true.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, so where ...

MR MALAN: Now which one is true, did you pay for the taxi or did you highjack the taxi? Or did you pay for the taxi after you had highjacked him? How do you explain this?

MR NDLOVU: The taxis were parked at the rank and I paid the driver for him to leave the taxi rank. We only highjacked the taxi when we came to a Masikane stop.

MR MALAN: Why did you pay for the first taxi?

MR NDLOVU: For the reason that he should leave the rank, because at that point there were many taxis parked there. And I had also informed him, lied to him, that the taxi that he was supposed to follow had my personal belongings in it.

MR MALAN: Can I take you back to your application. Your application form, you say

"We abducted and killed Victor Mtetwa ..."

This is question 9, page 11.

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, just before you proceed, Mr Malan.

What is Webber? Where is Webber?

MR DEHAL: May I help? It's a shopping centre.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Is that the shopping centre near the Rainbow Chicken Factory, Chicken works?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, it is.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Sorry, Mr Malan.

MR MALAN: You say that you - paragraph 9(a)(1), you abducted and killed Victor Mtetwa. Nature and particulars, you talk about the highjacking and the transferring by force and then under (b) you say

"That's how Victor Mtetwa died. I was caught and arrested after approximately three weeks after the incident."

Do you see that? You say -

"I belonged to the UDF."

... on page 13, and then you talk about the arrest and the assault and you couldn't admit. Nowhere do you say that you didn't actually kill him, or am I misreading it? Why did you not tell us in your application that you were not responsible in any direct way for the killing of Mtetwa?

MR NDLOVU: As I mentioned before, when I filled the form I was with a prison warder. I explained everything to him and he was the one who advised me on what to include in the form because the form itself was not very clear.

MR MALAN: Is your answer that the prison warder told you not to tell the Truth Commission that you did not physically kill Mtetwa? Is that what you're saying?

MR NDLOVU: No, he did not say so but I encountered(sic) the whole incident to him and because there was not enough space, the form did not have enough space, I did not include that, because I knew I would be granted an opportunity to come and explain it myself.

MR MALAN: There was circulated an investigation report and just for the record Chair, we may refer to this as Exhibit C.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, that would be C.

MR MALAN: According to this report you were visited by an Investigator of the Amnesty Committee, Sheila Mkhize, did you receive such a visit?

MR NDLOVU: Yes.

MR MALAN: Did she ask you to make a statement, because she says she did?

MR NDLOVU: When she addressed me she informed me that I could opt whether I want to make a statement to her or either that I make one when I appear before this Committee.

MR MALAN: And then you did give an explanation to her, is that correct?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, I did.

MR MALAN: Now she reports that you said to her that you were at your place of residence when the victim was murdered and you did not know who the responsible person was. I refer you to the second page, it's the last sentence in paragraph 3 on the second page of this report. Did you tell her that you were at home and you don't know who killed Mtetwa, and if so, why?

MR NDLOVU: No, I did not tell her that. What I said to Ms Mkhize was that I was present when he was kidnapped and also when we got to the township and also from the spot where we were before he was taken to be killed.

MR MALAN: You said earlier that you wanted to kill him at the taxi rank, why didn't you kill him at the taxi rank when you got there?

MR NDLOVU: It was for the reason that he did not go to Pinetown because he tried to catch a taxi to Pinetown, but he did not get one, so he went to board a taxi to Mpumalanga Township.

MR MALAN: Yes, but I understood you to say that you intended killing him at the taxi rank, not on a taxi but at the rank. Wasn't that your decision? Isn't that what you said you wanted to do?

MR NDLOVU: Let me just explain. From the moment that he did not board the taxi to Pinetown, maybe you'll understand me better ...(intervention)

MR MALAN: Now I have read that, I have read that he waited for one taxi, the taxi didn't arrive, then he changed his route to Hammarsdale, you followed him. I know all that, but I'm saying in your statement you say

"We wanted to kill him at the taxi rank."

Now I want to know what made you change your mind, not to kill him there?

CHAIRPERSON: In other words, why didn't you kill him at the taxi rank in Mpumalanga?

MR NDLOVU: We are known to a lot of people in Hammarsdale, but Pinetown is a big town and there aren't many people who know us. So after he had alighted from the taxi we would follow him and attack him there. But we are well-known in Hammarsdale.

MR MALAN: When you were questioned by Mr Panday about the reason for the killing of Victor Mtetwa, you said that he was IFP and that he was an informer to the police and that you were so told by another colleague of yours, the guard at the gate. I've forgot his name for the moment. Dlomo, the guard at the gate who searched you. In re-examination you were referred by Mr Dehal to paragraph 9 of your statement as additional reasons for killing Mtetwa.

CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct - no microphone)

MR MALAN: Sorry, I - ja. It's not too clear, my copy. Paragraph 8. Where you said

"He aligned himself squarely with the IFP ..."

That was also under cross-examination tendered.

"He identified leading ANC activists in our area and caused them to be executed."

Now tell us about this. Who did he identify who got executed?

MR NDLOVU: It was Cebu. I do not know his surname, but he came from our area. As well as Happy Dlomo, who they could not successfully attack.

MR MALAN: Are these the only two?

MR NDLOVU: Yes.

MR MALAN: Right. Then you continue, you say he was an informer to the police, that you also said under cross-examination, and to his seniors in the IFP, one would have expected it. Then you've continue and you say

"He intensified his struggle against us. He single-handedly, and in acting in concert with his IFP warlords, was the cause of many of our comrades ..."

The cause of death was -

"... the cause of the deaths of many of our comrades."

Now you gave us only two names, who are the other in these "many"?

MR NDLOVU: These that I've mentioned were direct hits, but he was behind the attacks that were carried out in the township because he was the one person who was able to move around the township. He was the person central to IFP attacks on the township.

MR MALAN: May I just quickly take you back to the statement of Mr Mbanjwa or Shelembe, as you refer to him, who denies his involvement, where he says he regularly visited Victor Mtetwa, that he, Mbanjwa or Shelembe, was a UDF member, Mtetwa was an IFP member. Now why did he not live in constant fear? Is he lying when he says he visited Mtetwa?

MR NDLOVU: I cannot say it with certainty that he is lying because it is quite a distance from Mr Shelembe's home to Victor's house.

MR MALAN: He also says he never suspected Victor or being a perpetrator, or the perpetrators were later arrested he says. This is paragraph 6. He talks about the deaths. He never suspected Victor. Did you ever discuss this reign of terror of Victor Mtetwa with Shelembe?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, we did discuss it on a Wednesday with Mr Shelembe.

MR MALAN: Now why was he not scared of Mtetwa, why did he visit him?

MR NDLOVU: From what I heard from the Investigator, Ms Mkhize yesterday, she said Victor and then are afraid that they are going to be arrested or prosecuted. This statement by Mr Shelembe also puzzles me.

MR MALAN: Did you say you met Ms Mkhize yesterday?

MR NDLOVU: That's correct.

MR MALAN: Where was this meeting?

MR NDLOVU: Just outside.

MR MALAN: Alright. Thank you, Chair.

MR DEHAL: Sorry, may I just come in here.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Sandi?

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry.

MR DEHAL: ... at that stage. It comes to me that a great surprise that this meeting took place yesterday. I don't know how regular it is and I've never known of this ...(indistinct), thanks to Mr Malan that this has come up.

CHAIRPERSON: It says at the top, 24.11.99.

MR DEHAL: I notice that.

MR MALAN: Well to be fair to her again, she didn't refer to that aspect in her statement. I'm referring to Mbanjwa's statement, where I took that information from.

MR DEHAL: Yes.

MS THABETHE: Mr Chair, I also think maybe it - because Ms Mkhize was here yesterday, maybe it was a conversation between her, not necessarily for the record.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you. Mr Sandi, do you have any questions?

ADV SANDI: Yes, just one question from me, Mr Chairman, thank you.

At page 14 right on top, when answering the question which says -

"Did you benefit in any way financially or otherwise?"

You say -

"Nothing besides being congratulated."

Who were you congratulated by?

MR NDLOVU: I was congratulated by Mdudu Shelembe. It was Mr Mdudu Shelembe. At that point he also was grateful for the fact that I did not mention their names, him and Skadla, when I was being prosecuted.

ADV SANDI: Where and when was this?

MR NDLOVU: When I returned to work, after I had been in the holding cells. That is towards the end of 1989.

ADV SANDI: Who else was there when he congratulated you?

MR NDLOVU: I was welcomed generally at work, so I cannot remember who else was present, but at work they were very pleased with me because in court I denied even having committed the crime.

ADV SANDI: How did he express himself, what did he say when congratulating you?

MR NDLOVU: He called me an ANC comrade and mentioned that if more comrades were like me, the struggle would continue as it should.

ADV SANDI: Thank you, Mr Chairman. Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

In your statement, Exhibit B, you say that you learnt that Mabongi killed Victor, from where did you learn that?

MR NDLOVU: I learnt of it when I arrived at the scene where Victor had been killed.

CHAIRPERSON: Did you see Mabongi there?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, I found him next to the body.

CHAIRPERSON: And then also on page 15 of the bundle it says in response to a question, question 12(e), you know were you charged in a court etc? Offence in respect of which you were found guilty and sentenced, if applicable and say

"Rape"

What do you mean by that? Is rape applicable in this matter at all, because I haven't heard anything to indicate that it is?

MR DEHAL: May I assist, Mr Chairperson, he's currently in custody on conviction on a count of rape.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, so this question shouldn't have been answered?

MR DEHAL: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: Alright. Because it just says "if applicable". Thank you. Any questions arising, Mr Dehal?

MR DEHAL: None, thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Panday?

FURTHER CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR PANDAY: Just one, Mr Chairman. Just upon perusing Exhibit A, it's come to my ...

Mr Ndlovu, tell me which township do you live in?

CHAIRPERSON: ...(indistinct) or now?

MR NDLOVU: Mpumalanga Township.

CHAIRPERSON: At the time, 1989, at the time of this incident.

MR NDLOVU: Mpumalanga Township.

MR PANDAY: And Victor Mtetwa, which township was he from?

MR NDLOVU: Woody Glen in Mpumalanga.

MR PANDAY: And is that close to you?

MR NDLOVU: Yes, it is.

MR PANDAY: Right. Now Mr Ndlovu, what I'm going to put to you is that, it is my submission that your entire action was personal for the simply reason that if one has to look at your affidavit, Exhibit A, and one has to go through the averments, you keep on referring to I did this I did that and only upon cross-examination that you start to implicate comrades and leaders. And I refer you to paragraph 9 of your affidavit, on page 2, where you mention that

"I went to Mandla Khanyile, who was the leader of the UDF in the township. I asked him for a 9mm pistol which he promised to give me on Thursday."

Now this seems to indicate that he didn't know what you were going to do with this pistol, but yet he was your leader. Can you comment on that? Can you give us the answer why you only refer to yourself and not the others in your affidavits?

MR NDLOVU: I'm explaining that Mandla had faith in us because we had been trained and also for the reason that I did not have complete faith in some of the comrades. I informed Mandla about everything before he even issued the weapon to me and he told me that I should not show this weapon to Mabongi because Mabongi himself did not ascribe to the policy of the organisation fully.

MR PANDAY: Thank you.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS BY MR PANDAY

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Thabethe, any questions arising?

MS THABETHE: No, no questions, Mr Chair.

NO QUESTIONS BY MS THABETHE

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you, Mr Ndlovu, that concludes your testimony.

WITNESS EXCUSED

CHAIRPERSON: I think it would be an appropriate time to take the lunch adjournment now. Well, it's twenty past one, we'll take the lunch - unless you want to argue now beforehand. Mr Dehal?

MR DEHAL IN ARGUMENT: Thank you, Sir.

Mr Chairperson and Honourable Members, I submit respectfully that the applicant has complied with Section 20 of the Act and that he has shown his political lineage and despite thorough intense cross-examination, has not faltered in any material respect or at all, in regard to these two aspects, namely his political lineage and full disclosure.

We must look at his application against the background of what truly is the position and namely that he has not been convicted of this offence, he is not incarcerated because of that. In fact it so happens he's incarcerated because of another rape incident.

MR MALAN: Just for record purposes, as a matter of interest, for how long is he still due to be in prison, do you have any idea?

MR DEHAL: May I just find out quickly? Eight years as from 1996, April.

CHAIRPERSON: About five years.

MR DEHAL: Thank you.

So Mr Chairperson, there would be in the circumstances, no motive, no reason for him to lie, there is no adverse consequence in the event of the application for amnesty being refused. He's come to this forum out of his own volition, feeling a sense of guilt in the involvement of the death of Victor Mtetwa. Surely on his own version he's had a very active role to play. He appeared to have been the mastermind for the death of Victor Mtetwa. He orchestrated the death, he went to his senior, the command in chief, found a firearm, talked to the comrades, sought a decision and endeavoured to execute that decision. Unfortunately the deceased came to be killed before he got to the deceased. But his evidence is, with a ring of truth in it, that if the deceased was not executed ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: But I think also on his version there was a conspiracy to kill the deceased, which included Mabongi, and that conspiracy was carried out to the end and in fact Mabongi killed him. I think that makes him a perpetrator yes, on his version.

MR DEHAL: Indeed.

CHAIRPERSON: So we're looking at murder rather than just conspiracy. That's all I'm saying.

MR DEHAL: No doubt. Correctly taken, Mr Chair, it's murder by common purpose.

Mr Chairperson, my submission is that his political lineage is not to be tainted by the fact that he has now made open disclosure about the allegation that the deceased called him I-kula. Within the realm of the broader spectrum of the political gameplay, I-kula was a catalyst that gave rise to many other events. But I-kula, the term itself, wasn't the only basis which served for the applicant to execute a mental intention to kill Mtetwa and then to set the ball in motion to obtain a firearm, seek out Mtetwa and kill him.

I have seldom heard applicants in the nature of this application, who despite rigorous cross-examination has maintained his position. Where on occasions he was questioned about his colleague who has now made the statement which I dare say we all know has only now arrived before us, that statement of Mr Alfeus Mduduzi, two things arise. Mr Ndlovu the applicant, has not had time to reflect upon the contents of this statement or to doctor his version in order to better suit and taylor his own case. As originally submitted without any breaks when he testified, Mr Ndlovu had regard only to a given small aspects of these, confirmed those two aspects which Chair, you raised with me. And when subsequently on cross-examination on questions led by the Members of the Committee, he was questioned about aspects that appear anomalous, aspects that appear are contradictory, aspects that appear lastly in conflict with the material aspects of his own application. The applicant said yes, I don't doubt what Mr Mduduzi says, what he says is correct, but he says it for different reasons, I say it for other reasons. And he maintained that on and on. ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Sorry, before you proceed, Mr Dehal, I didn't know if I'd asked. Are you calling any witnesses, Mr Panday? I'm sorry.

MR PANDAY: No, no, Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Thabethe?

MS THABETHE: No, Mr Chair.

CHAIRPERSON: I think when I was about to adjourn when we had finished his evidence, then it was decided to argue and I didn't put that and if you wish to call any witnesses, please feel free to do so. Thank you, you may continue.

MR DEHAL: Thank you, Chair.

Sorry, just two aspects in addition. The political lineage has not been contested at any level. There has been, as I said, aggressive ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, it's never been suggested that he wasn't UDF or ANC aligned.

MR DEHAL: And additionally, the inference that his political association with the UDF/MK etc., was not - or sorry, may I put it differently, that the death of Mtetwa was not a political event, was never contested at any level, meritoriously or at all, with any weight.

CHAIRPERSON: It was contested quite vigorously by Mr Panday, who asserts that it was a personal grudge, the grudge arising from a work related incident.

MR DEHAL: Sorry, wrong choice or word, forgive me.

Indeed it was contested in cross-examination. My submission is that Mr Ndlovu has not in any way fallen under cross-examination on that point, he maintained his political aspect, he maintains that Mtetwa was killed as a result of a political agenda and it wasn't a personal grudge. He maintains this strongly, he asserts it correctly. And however much the cross-examination went in ...(indistinct) routes, he came back to the point that it was always a political agenda.

I think the repetitious cross-examination and various other questions about the I-kula aspect, brought out of context the general killing as per the evidence of Mr Ndlovu, he however took it out of that context but simply for the purpose of full disclosure, dealt with the I-kula aspect.

As to the full disclosure, my submission is that he's talked about I-kula, he's talked about his involvement in a matter in which he's been arrested, charges withdrawn, not convicted, he's come here of his own volition, on motive, no desire, no reason to lie, and has made full disclosure.

I could deal at great length in regard to each of the aspects dealt with in the evidence, but I think that's common cause. I leave that in your respectful hands. Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Dehal. Mr Panday?

MR PANDAY IN ARGUMENT: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

Mr Chairman, one wonders why the applicant would now come and seek amnesty, he's got nothing to loose, he's got nothing to worry about. I think one must take cognisance of the record, the charges were withdrawn. Withdrawn doesn't imply an acquittal, it is merely to state that until the State has further evidence, they may elect to charge the applicant further.

Now I think it has been established that the applicant has five years to complete his current sentence. The risk is that if in the event substantial evidence is now obtained, I think it is common cause that one knows that, and a charge of murder does not prescribe ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, it's quite clear. I mean there's the possibility that charges could be laid at any time.

MR PANDAY: Yes, the charge for murder doesn't prescribe and by then this Commission would have seen its day and over, and what next to the applicant? He now faces a charge of murder.

It has been submitted that there has been no faulting of the applicant in terms of his evidence, in terms of him being politically motivated. That is correct, one may even accept that he was in the UDF, he was part of some struggle, but then the issue that was contested was, was his act against Victor Mtetwa, political or personal.

Now it is strange that he was the only UDF member who felt threatened, he was the only UDF member that realised of the attacks on other ANC members like UDF members. We've had a statement being submitted by a Mr Shelembe, as the applicant refers to, and he denies such activity. In fact he goes so bold as to say that there was a good relationship between the victim and himself ...(intervention

CHAIRPERSON: Why would Mabongi have killed the deceased?

MR PANDAY: Mabongi? Now that Mr Chairman, one can't seem to realise as to why he becomes the implicated person. As to why he carried out the act, one doesn't even know, he hasn't been convicted on this matter. There's no evidence to indicate that anyone has been convicted.

CHAIRPERSON: It doesn't seem like there's been - well there may have been a trial because he says that Bhekisisa was a acquitted but that might be a withdrawal or it might have been a trial.

MR PANDAY: That is correct.

CHAIRPERSON: But we've got none of that before us.

MR PANDAY: Now Mr Chairman, it's my respectful submission that whilst my learned friend Ms Thabethe, tried to give the Committee an indication as to what the word I-kula meant, it was vigorously opposed in that she may not be an expert. But one mustn't lose sight as to what the meaning of the word is.

CHAIRPERSON: No, I think it's quite clear, and I don't think it was disputed, I think it's quite clear that, and it's common cause that the word means, is used to refer to people with permy hair. Now we don't know whether some people might have used that word as a derogatory sense in a particular area or not. I mean a Pansy refers to a flower and if you use it, certain people use it in certain circumstances, it might not mean a flower but might be a derogatory word. You know what I mean?

MR PANDAY: Yes.

CHAIRPERSON: So it's common cause that what Ms Thabethe says is the meaning of the word, that is so. I don't know if Ms Thabethe or anyone here can say well, if that word was used in that context at that place, at that time, it was derogatory or not. That's what I meant by expert evidence as to the meaning.

MR PANDAY: I concede the point. But Mr Chairman, if one takes the word I-kula in context with the manner the applicant conducted his political association, he distinctly points out in Exhibit A, that his political affiliation was a secret. Now the only inference that can be drawn is that for one to have referred to him as, or used the word I-kula on him, would merely have referred to him as being Indian and not associating him with any political party. And it is quite evident from his affidavit, he continuously refers to I did this, I, and only upon cross-examination does he then seek to implicate others. To ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: He implicates others in his statement here, he says Mabongi killed him. In his application form he says, he implicates Mduduzi and all those people.

MR PANDAY: If I may rephrase that. He seems to ...(indistinct) that there people took the decision as to how or whether Victor Mtetwa would have to be killed and he implicates Mandla Khanyile and two others.

Now Mr Chairman, it is my submission, respectful submission that whilst one may not be able to contest that the applicant was a political activist, it is my respectful submission that his actions and the aggression directed towards Victor Mtetwa was not politically motivated and such was merely as a personal vendetta that carried through, and he now tries to use a political basis to seek amnesty, thereby safeguarding himself from future prosecution.

ADV SANDI: But where is the evidence as the basis for that submission?

MR PANDAY: Mr Chairman, it was submitted that the family is of the opinion that this was a personal vendetta. It was put to the accused and the accused in his paragraph 6, indicates that there was a personal, or a name-calling that had taken place, and maintains that this at first was not reason enough to kill someone. And it is subsequent to establishing the victim's political history that that actually led to his killing.

ADV SANDI: Ja, but isn't there a problem here because there was no evidence to that effect, evidence that was subjected to cross-examination? We only heard the evidence of the applicant.

MR PANDAY: I concede the point, Mr Chairman. But as I said it was put in that my instructions were and the families of the victims would not have been able to take it any further, but to merely ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: It's common cause that that word was used. I think that's common cause, the applicant admits it in fact. In fact it was raised by the applicant, the applicant introduces the word.

MR PANDAY: Thank you, Mr Chairman.

CHAIRPERSON: Ms Thabethe?

MS THABETHE: I have nothing further to add, Mr Chair.

NO ARGUMENT BY MS THABETHE

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Mr Dehal, any reply?

MR DEHAL IN REPLY: Just two things, Mr Chair. The statement of Mr Shelembe was simply handed in, no evidence was called in that regard. I submit the evidential weight to be attached to that statement, any aspects that arise, must be as minimal as any. It has not been tested. If Mr Shelembe were called I would have cross-examined him at length on aspects ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: We understand the evidential value of it, Mr Dehal.

MR DEHAL: Thank you. Likewise on that basis, it must be accepted that this application stands largely uncontested by evidential weight from the opposition, by respondents or witnesses called and therefore any objection is based purely on credibility emanating from cross-examination. To that extent that applicant's application remains, apart from cross-examination, uncontested.

I submit that the application has been well-founded, he has made a case and it should be granted. Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you. We'll reserve our decision in this matter and we hope, like the other matters, to get it out as soon as possible.

We will now take the lunch adjournment. And then after that, Ms Thabethe, we'll be commencing with the Khanyile matter?

MS THABETHE: Yes, Mr Chair.

MR DEHAL: Chair, may I seek an indulgence, it will take 30 seconds. I have two matters left. The Mafu matter, we have not received a bundle and the TRC and I ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: I don't think it's on our roll. As far as we know, we haven't received any bundles either. We're rapidly running out of time this week and even if we do receive a bundle, the chances of us getting to that matter seems to be remote.

MR DEHAL: The point that I wanted to make is that this Mafu matter is adjourned by agreement, to the 13th of December.

CHAIRPERSON: Oh is it?

MR DEHAL: And may I just raise this. Gebhu Ngubane, which is on the roll, unfortunately the problem here is that Mr Ngubane had arrived here on Monday, he has some financial problems ...(intervention)

CHAIRPERSON: Oh I heard about that, yes.

MR DEHAL: Now could I seek the indulgence to have this matter adjourned to the 13th and I'll talk to the TRC to try and get him available by the 13th.

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, I think if - perhaps the best way would be to work with Ms Thabethe. I don't know what the situation is with the 13th. I know that that week is a short week in that there's a public holiday and then there's a recess after that. So I wouldn't like to order a postponement just for it to be crowded out. I don't know what the state of that roll is. I suggest if you just link up with Ms Thabethe and it may well be able to be set down. We as a Commission obviously would like the sooner the better, to get matters dealt with.

MR DEHAL: Thank you. Could I then be excused because that puts an end to all my matters?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes, thank you, Mr Dehal. I'd like to thank you for your assistance in these matters.

MR PANDAY: Mr Chairman, I'm also involved in the two matters Mr Dehal has raised, but in the circumstances may I be excused until contacted by the TRC?

CHAIRPERSON: Yes. Mr Panday, I'd also like to thank you very much for the assistance that you've rendered us during this week. Thank you.

We'll now take the lunch adjournment, half-an-hour?

MS THABETHE: Am I not excused?

CHAIRPERSON: No you're not excused, Ms Thabethe.

COMMITTEE ADJOURNS